Ctic  CatfjeDral  dBDition 


THE  WORKS  OF  THE  RT.  REV. 
CHARLES  C.  GRAFTON,  S.T.D.,  LL.D. 

SECOND    BISHOP   OF    FOND   DU    LAC 

EDITED  BY 
B.  TALBOT   ROGERS,  M.A.,  D.D. 

WARDEN    OF    GRAFTON    HALL,   CANON    OF    ST.    PAUL'S 
CATHEDRAL,    FOND    DU    LAC 


IN  EIGHT  VOLUMES 
VOLUME  I 


MCMXIV 


TO  OUR  ADORABLE  LORD 
AND  ONLY  SAVIOUR 

JESUS  CHRIST 

THIS  RECORD  OF  THE   LIFE,  LOVE   AND   WORKS 

OF    HIS   DEVOTED    SAINT 
IS   REVERENTLY   INSCRIBED 


IT  has  been  a  very  great  privilege  to  be  allowed  to 
collect  the  writings  of  Bishop  Grafton. 

The  spiritual  opportunity  in  so  humble  an  occu- 
pation as  reading  the  proof  for  this  edition  has  been 
to  take  a  course  in  theology,  and  to  learn  the  deep 
spiritual  convictions  of  a  long  life  that  was  conse- 
crated with  unswerving  consistency  to  the  service 
of  Jesus  Christ  for  the  extension  of  His  Kingdom  in 
the  hearts  and  lives  of  his  fellow-men  by  the  bonds 
of  the  life-giving  sacraments  of  the  Holy  Catholic 
Church. 

We  have  undertaken  to  gather  Bishop  Grafton's 
literary  remains  in  a  uniform  edition  of  eight  vol- 
umes that  includes  a  volume  of  his  Sermons  and 
Letters.  A  volume  of  miscellanies  could  be  in- 
creased to  two  or  three,  but  in  writing  for  so  many 
different  occasions  the  same  teaching  was  often  re- 
peated in  altered  form.  In  order  to  avoid  repeti- 
tion it  was  necessary  to  omit  much  that  might 
otherwise  have  been  included,  but  it  has  been  our 
aim  to  preserve  all  that  the  Bishop  taught  in  his 
writings  without  diminution  or  alteration. 

The  value  of  his  writings  is  largely  due  to  the 
representative  character  of  his  life.  It  was  repre- 


vi  INTRODUCTION 

sentative,  in  a  broad  and  large  way,  of  the  Church's 
work.  It  illustrates  for  the  individual  and  the 
Church  the  results  of  loyalty  to  our  Catholic  heritage. 
He  would  be  the  first  to  deny  any  originality  in  his 
writings.  He  ever  sought  to  be  loyal  and  bear 
faithful  witness  to  "the  Faith  once  for  all  delivered 
to  the  Saints." 

The  value  of  the  personal  equation  was  his  ability 
to  translate  that  teaching  into  the  terms  of  modern 
thought,  and  to  indicate  the  manner  of  its  applica- 
tion to  the  life  and  problems  of  to-day. 

In  his  autobiography,  so  aptly  called,  "A  Journey 
Godward,"  he  indicates  his  early  environment  as 
Puritan  and  Calvinistic.  From  this  he  revolted  in 
early  manhood  and,  as  is  often  the  case,  he  gave  his 
allegiance  to  that  form  of  Church  teaching  and  ser- 
vice that  emphasizes  the  Church's  differences  from 
Protestantism  rather  than  Her  resemblance  to  the 
modern  religious  bodies  and  movements  about  Her. 

It  was  always  his  contention  that  the  Church  held 
a  stronger  position  and  was  more  likely  to  succeed  by 
showing  that  she  had  something  to  give  those  out- 
side Her  Communion.  He  thought  that  it  was 
more  statesmanlike  as  well  as  loyal  to  Her  standard 
to  uphold  Her  Catholic  heritage  and  privileges 
rather  than  to  represent  Her  as  one  of  many  denomi- 
nations. 

After  ten  years  of  devoted  service  in  Maryland 
he  went  to  England  and  threw  himself  into  the 
second  stage  of  the  Oxford  movement  that  inaugu- 
rated Parochial  Missions  and  founded  Religious 


INTRODUCTION  vii 

Communities.  For  seven  years  he  took  the  training 
and  experience  that  an  active  part  in  this  work  gave 
him. 

It  was  always  a  satisfaction  to  him  to  have  known 
Dr.  Pusey,  and  to  have  assisted  him  in  services, 
so  that  he  was  able  to  answer  those  who  raised  the 
question,  that  Dr.  Pusey  not  only  loyally  set  forth 
the  Catholic  faith  and  teaching  of  the  Church,  but 
also  used  all  the  traditional  ceremonial  that  accom- 
panied and  illustrated  that  teaching,  as  lights,  in- 
cense, vestments  and  acts  of  adoration. 

He  returned  to  Boston  in  1872  and  for  sixteen 
years  proved  himself  a  past  master  hi  the  art  and 
generalship  of  organizing  and  developing  a  great 
city  parish.  Opposition  from  within  and  without 
led  to  the  development  of  two  strong  parishes  where 
one  weak  one  had  been  before.  Both  may  be 
counted  as  monuments  to  his  zeal  and  devotion  and 
Christian  forbearance.  The  Church  throughout 
New  England  was  stronger  and  better  for  his  wise 
leadership. 

Then  for  twenty-three  years  he  served  his  Master 
as  Bishop  of  Fond  du  Lac.  We  are  still  under  the 
spell  of  his  influence,  and  it  is  impossible  to  estimate 
the  value  of  that  on  the  American  Church.  That 
he  remade  a  diocese  and  set  an  example  that  many 
seek  to  emulate,  that  his  influence  on  legislation  was 
statesmanlike,  that  the  Canons  on  Provinces,  Re- 
ligious Orders,  and  many  others  were  his  drafting, 
and  that  he  warded  off  much  adverse  legislation  is 
well  known.  His  writings  during  the  later  years  of 


viii  INTRODUCTION 

his  episcopate  circulated  throughout  the  Anglican 
Communion.  That  he  will  rank  as  one  of  the  great 
leaders  we  cannot  doubt.  He  was  the  first  Monk 
to  be  made  a  Bishop  since  the  Reformation,  and  he 
earnestly  strove  to  restore  all  spiritual  privileges  in 
the  Church. 

In  his  published  works  the  Bishop  aimed  at  the 
practical  and  useful  rather  than  the  scholarly. 

Volume  one  of  this  edition,  "  Christian  and  Catho- 
lic," is  most  valuable  because  it  is  a  well  adapted 
work  in  Apologetics.  It  aims  to  meet  the  present 
need  for  a  readable  book  on  the  grounds  of  Relig- 
ion, the  Christian  Religion,  and  the  Catholic  Religion 
distinguished  on  the  one  hand  from  Protestantism 
and  on  the  other  from  Romanism.  So  well  adapted 
for  present  needs  has  it  proved  that  one  Bishop 
wrote  from  Australia  that  he  was  giving  it  to  his 
Lay  readers  to  use  in  place  of  sermons. 

Volume  two,  "The  Lineage  of  the  American 
Catholic  Church,"  isintended  as  an  exposition  of  the 
essential  marks  of  the  Church,  and  the  turning  points 
in  Her  history  that  seemed  most  important  to  stress 
at  this  time.  It  has  been  eagerly  read,  and  especially 
by  those  outside  Her  Communion.  Her  histori- 
cal continuity,  essential  Catholicity,  and  national 
peculiarities  have  been  treated  with  clearness  and 
loyalty. 

Volume  three,  "A  Catholic  Atlas, "  is  a  theological 
prompter  and  analysis  of  the  entire  field  of  theology. 
It  is  well  called  an  Atlas  and  is  like  a  geographical 
and  topographical  Chart  of  Christian  Dogma.  It 


INTRODUCTION  ix 

has  proved  most  valuable  to  theological  students, 
and  to  parochial  clergy  in  preparing  outlines  for 
courses  of  Instruction,  Lectures,  and  Sermons. 

Volume  four,  "A  Journey  Godward, "  is  the  revela- 
tion of  a  long  life  dedicated  to  the  service  of  Christ 
and  His  Church  in  early  manhood,  and  consistently 
true  to  that  gift  of  Himself  to  the  closing  hours  of 
life  and  his  viaticum. 

With  all  the  enthusiasm  of  youth  he  gave  himself 
to  the  Religious  life  and  kept  the  threefold  vows  to 
the  end.  He  founded  a  number  of  Communities, 
though  contrary  to  his  own  desires  deprived  at  last 
by  circumstances  beyond  his  control  of  the  help 
and  companionship  of  Community  life. 

His  consistency  and  singleness  of  purpose  was 
indicated  by  the  fact  that  friends  of  his  early  days 
loyally  supported  his  efforts  to  the  end. 

Volume  five  gathers  up  his  teaching  on  the  Re- 
ligious life. 

Volume  six,  his  practice  as  a  priest  at  the  Altar 
and  his  Missionary  pamphlets  known  as  the  Fond 
du  Lac  Tracts. 

Volume  seven  contains  selections  from  his  Corre- 
spondence. It  begins  with  an  essay  on  the  Slavery 
Question,  his  earliest  extant  writing  includes  his  letters 
from  Oxford  at  the  time  of  the  founding  of  the  Society 
of  St.  John  the  Evangelist,  at  Cowley  St.  John,  Ox- 
ford, and  covers  his  association  with  Dr.  Pusey,  Dr. 
Neale,  and  Canon  Liddon.  His  later  letters  were 
filled  with  Church  teaching  and  a  love  for  souls. 
This  volume  concludes  with  a  letter  to  his  Indians. 


x  INTRODUCTION 

Volume  eight  contains  Sermons,  Addresses,  and 
Meditations. 

Let  us  here  acknowledge  the  debt  of  sincere  grati- 
tude that  we  owe  to  the  Hon.  Elbridge  T.  Gerry, 
LL.D.,  whose  generous  devotion  has  made  this  work 
possible.  It  is  eminently  fitting  that  his  name 
should  be  associated  with  this  enterprise.  As  a 
layman  he  has  stood  before  the  world  as  an  uncom- 
promising Catholic,  and  has  crystallized  his  faith  in 
permanent  foundations,  and  a  life  of  service  for  the 
welfare  of  others,  especially  in  arousing  the  Ameri- 
can Conscience  as  to  its  duty  toward  Children.  It 
was  he  who  made  possible  the  manifestation  of 
Catholic  worship  throughout  an  entire  diocese,  and 
laid  enduring  foundations  that  give  promise  of  per- 
petuating the  faith  and  service  of  Bishop  Grafton 
for  many  generations. 

The  proceeds  from  the  sale  of  this  edition  will 
help  to  perpetuate  the  Bishop's  work  in  the  cause 
of  Religion. 

Devout  souls  north,  south,  east,  and  west  looked  to 
him  as  a  spiritual  leader  who  never  failed  them,  nor 
swerved  from  the  narrow  way.  For  their  sakes  this 
uniform  edition  of  his  writings  is  compiled.  May 
their  faith  and  loyalty  be  further  strengthened. 
And  may  we  who  knew  and  loved  him,  and  those 
who  come  to  know  him  by  his  works,  have  the 
Grace  of  final  perseverance. 

B.  TALBOT  ROGERS. 

ST.  PAUL'S  CATHEDRAL,  FOND  DU  LAC, 
Whitsuntide,  1914. 


CHRISTIAN  AND  CATHOLIC 


CHRISTIAN 
AND   CATHOLIC 


BY 

THE  RIGHT  REVEREND 
CHARLES  C.  GRAFTON,  S.T.D.,  LL.D. 

BISHOP   OF    FOND   DU    LAC 


NEW  EDITION 


LONGMANS,    GREEN,    AND    CO 
FOURTH  AVENUE  &•  30TH  STREET,  NEW  YORK 
LONDON,  BOMBAY,  CALCUTTA  AND  MADRAS 
IQI4 


COPYRIGHT,     1905 
BY    LONGMANS,    GREEN,    AND    CO. 


First  Edition,  February,  1905 

Second  Edition  (revised),  May,  1905 

Reprinted,  November,  1906,  and  December,  1907 

Third  Edition  (revised),  January,  1910 


Cathedral  Edition,  October,  1914 


THE'PLIUPTON- PRESS 

NORWUOD-MASS-U'S-A 


To 

MY    DEAR   AND    ESTEEMED    FRIEND 

ELBRIDGE   T.    GERRY,  LL.D. 
SENIOR  WARDEN  OF  S.  EDWARD'S  THE  MARTYR, 

BY    PERSONAL    SERVICE, 

A  PROTECTOR  OF  CHRIST'S  LITTLE  ONES; 

A  DEVOUT  UPHOLDER  OF 

CATHOLICK  FAITH  AND  WORSHIP, 

WHO  WELL  ILLUSTRATES  THE  TlTLB 

OF  THIS  BOOK 


PREFACE 


THIS  book  is  not  controversial.  In  these  days 
of  unbelief  we  are  only  too  glad  to  recognize 
believers  in  Christ,  whatever  degree  of  faith  they 
may  have  attained.  By  whatever  name  nonconform- 
ists and  sectarians  call  themselves,  we  recognize  all 
baptized  and  faithful  followers  of  Christ  as  Christians. 
The  sins  of  former  generations  which  rent  us  apart 
will  not  make  us  guilty  of  schism  if  we  do  not  refuse 
enlightenment  and  seek  for  reunion.  We  recognize, 
on  the  other  hand,  the  Orthodox  Churches  of  the  East 
and  the  Roman  Catholic  as  portions  of  the  Church  of 
Christ  and  their  members  as  our  fellow  churchmen. 
They  are  most  potent  agencies  in  the  preservation 
of  the  Christian  religion.  In  the  devotion  of  their 
members  we  recognize  a  zeal  we  might  well  emulate. 
We  gladly  welcome  all  acts  of  Christian  recognition 
on  their  part  and  are  ready  to  reciprocate  them. 
Our  Church  accepts  their  orders  and  places  no  bar- 
riers in  the  way  of  intercommunion. 

Our  purpose  in  writing  is  to  offer  some  help,  if  by 
God's  grace  we  can  do  so,  to  any  who,  as  they  say, 
wish  to  believe  but  cannot ;  or,  believing  in  God  and 
Christianity,  are  for  any  cause  in  doubt  as  to  their 
duty  respecting  church  membership.  There  are,  we 
know,  many  such.  Yet  we  would  sincerely  say  that 
our  chief  desire  is  not  to  make  them  converts,  much 


xviii  PREFACE 

as  we  love  it,  to  that  special  portion  of  Christ's  Body 
the  Church  to  which  we  belong. 

The  reason  of  this  is  that  our  religious  experience 
has  developed  in  us  a  strong  antagonism  to  prosely- 
tism.  There  is  apt  to  be  so  much  of  what  is  merely 
selfish  and  sectarian  in  it.  Men  want  to  get  others 
to  join  their  side,  their  party,  their  church,  by  way  of 
triumph  over  some  other  body,  or  party,  or  church. 
They  want  their  side  to  win,  their  congregation,  parish, 
or  sect  to  grow.  They  want  to  enlarge  their  tale  of 
converts,  after  the  manner  of  a  Roman  triumph,  that 
all  the  world  may  see  how  successful  they  are.  This 
spirit  leads  in  almost  every  town  to  jealousies  and 
rivalries  between  sects  and  churches.  It  undermines, 
however,  their  spiritual  life. 

The  professional  proselytizer,  as  we  know  the  class, 
is  a  repulsive  character.  He  studies  the  art  of 
injecting  doubts  into  devout  minds,  of  playing  on 
the  weaknesses  and  vanities  of  his  proposed  con- 
verts. He  exaggerates  the  discords  within  their 
church,  the  contrariant  opinions,  the  lack  of  discip- 
line. Sometimes  he  cajoles,  sometimes  he  seeks  to 
terrify,  sometimes  he  tries  to  influence  by  social  ad- 
vantages, sometimes  he  seeks  to  take  souls  captive 
by  subtle  sophisms.  He  is  apt  to  be  self-deceived  as 
well  as  a  deceiver,  while  asserting  that  he  is  working 
for  the  "greater  glory  of  God."  In  reality  he  is  doing 
what  our  Lord  condemned  in  the  Pharisees.  They 
compassed  heaven  and  earth  to  make  proselytes,  but 
failed  grievously  in  making  them  true  children  of 
God.  For  themselves  and  their  converts  the  result" 
was  just  the  opposite. 


PREFACE  xix 

It  is  right  to  try  to  help  our  brothers  who  are  in 
honest  doubt,  just  in  the  same  spirit  as  we  would  be 
glad  for  them  to  help  us  when  in  need.  It  is  right  if 
our  motive  is  to  aid  any  Christian  soul  to  come  into 
closer  union  with  Christ.  Even  should  any  one  be- 
lieve that  his  church  was  the  only  true  one,  yet  to 
work  for  it  in  the  same  spirit  one  works  for  the 
success  of  an  earthly  object  is  to  belie  its  character. 
We  must  work,  not  for  any  personal  gain  but  as 
Christ  did.  Our  guiding  pole-star  must  be  the  good 
of  others'  souls.  If  our  own  words  are  found  of  help 
to  any,  enabling  them  to  know  better  God's  Will,  in 
whatever  way  He  leads  them,  may  they  have  grace 
to  follow  it. 

Our  purpose  will  be  also  accomplished  if  in  these 
days  of  absorbing  secular  interests  we  can  aid  in 
arousing  religious  inquiry.  With  the  baubles  of  am- 
bition clinking  on  the  ear  and  cheating  the  eye,  with 
the  engrossing  dream  of  splendid  luxury  captivating 
the  heart,  many  impatiently  push  aside  any  suggestion 
of  religion.  Others  give  a  slight  but  superficial  con- 
sideration to  it.  By  the  law  of  association  of  ideas, 
thoughts  idly  come  and  as  idly  go  through  our  minds. 
We  cannot  stop  this  any  more  than  the  circulation  of 
our  blood.  But  it  is  not  painstaking  thinking.  No 
wonder  the  air  is  laden  with  murmurings  and  com- 
plaints of  the  disappointed,  when  so  many  never 
seriously  face  the  problems,  what  are  we,  why  are  we 
here,  what  will  our  future  be,  in  what  does  our  real 
happiness  consist,  and  what  will  bring  a  man  peace 
at  the  last? 

Some  deliberately  refuse  to  entertain  these  ques- 


xx  PREFACE 

tions.  Religion  is  not  like  a  philosophy  or  literature 
or  science.  She  stands  over  against  our  conscience, — 
a  stern  censor,  —  and  demands  something.  Steep  and 
craggy  is  the  ascent  to  the  eternal  heights,  and  it  calls 
for  exertion.  She  calls  us  to  a  life  which  has  not  self- 
interest  for  its  governing  principle,  but  to  one  based 
on  the  higher  motive  of  service.  The  consequence  is 
that  whether  a  man  believes  or  not  depends  largely  on 
his  predispositions  and  will.  With  the  self-indulgent 
or  self-satisfied  Christianity  has  but  little  chance. 
God  may  have  seemingly  exhausted  the  resources  of 
His  entreaties,  but  His  children  stop  their  ears  and 
harden  their  hearts. 

Yet  there  are  those  who  do  wish  help  and  are  glad 
to  receive  it.  They  care  not  by  whose  hands  the 
Lamp  of  Truth  is  held  up  to  them ;  it  is  the  light 
they  want.  They  are  alive  to  the  folly  of  neglecting 
investigation  and  longer  postponing  decision.  Oppor- 
tunity has  been  likened  to  an  Angel  that  presents 
herself  with  bandaged  eyes  and  winged  feet.  Her 
eyes  are  bandaged,  for  men  so  often  fail  to  discern 
her  presence ;  her  feet  are  winged,  for  she  so  quickly 
takes  her  flight.  The  Voice  of  God  speaking  within 
the  soul  says  "  To-day  is  the  accepted  time,  to-day  is 
the  day  of  Salvation."  The  call  is  a  loving  and  an 
imperative  one,  and  our  prayerful  response  should  be, 
"O  God,  make  me  willing  in  this  day  of  Thy  power." 

C.  C.  FOND  DU  LAC. 


CONTENTS 


PAGE 

PREFACE xvii 

PART  I.  —  CHRISTIAN. 

CHAPTER    I. 
RELIGION. 

Definition.  A  union  between  God  and  man.  The  existence  of  one 
supreme  intelligent  and  will  energy.  Its  necessary  personality. 
The  nature  of  man.  Three  degrees  of  his  union  with  God, — by 
nature,  grace,  and  glory.  The  first  two  concern  us  now.  The  need 
of  a  response  in  order  to  know  God.  Religion  thus  developed  brings 
strength  and  joy  to  man 3 

CHAPTER   II. 
HEAVEN'S  AMBASSADOR. 

The  revelation  of  God  to  man  a  gradual  and  progressive  one.  It  has 
presented  itself  in  other  forms  than  that  of  Christianity.  But  Chris- 
tianity presents  the  noblest  conception  of  God  and  the  highest  end 
for  man.  What,  then,  think  ye  of  its  founder,  Christ  ?  He  was  a 
teacher  sent  by  God.  This  proved  by  His  coming  in  fulfilment  of 
prophecy.  It  declared  His  three  offices  and  set  forth  His  life  and 
death.  Our  need  of  such  a  teacher 17 

CHAPTER    III. 
THE  DIVINE  TEACHER. 

Christ  was  unique.  Certain  characteristics  of  Christ  show  that  He  does 
not  belong  to  the  category  of  a  mere  man.  This  proved  by  the  fact 
that  He  was  free  from  those  prejudices  no  other  known  man  has  been 


xxii  CONTENTS 

PAGE 

without.  The  singular  perfection  of  His  character  combining  both 
masculine  and  feminine  excellence.  The  balanced  union  of  the 
active  and  contemplative  aspects  of  His  spiritual  life.  His  minute 
obedience  to  the  previously  revealed  divine  plan  for  the  world's 
redemption.  His  inner  life,  its  supernatural  motives  and  self- 
sacrifice  and  death.  His  unique  sinlessness.  His  life  and  character 
become  a  warrant  of  His  truthfulness.  His  teaching  primarily  con- 
cerns Himself.  He  claims  a  pre-existent  life,  to  have  been  sent  from 
heaven,  and  to  be  one  with  the  Father  as  the  Son  of  God  ....  30 

CHAPTER   IV. 
THE  GREAT  CREDENTIAL. 

The  resurrection.  Christ  prophesied  He  would  rise  and  He  kept  His 
word.  Sunday  a  witness  to  it.  The  resurrection  examined.  His 
death  proved.  Answer  to  objections  why  He  showed  not  Himself 
to  Pilate.  His  resurrection  borne  witness  to  both  by  His  enemies 
and  friends.  The  former  give  us  five  distinct  confirmatory  evidences. 
Many  of  them  also  changed  their  minds  and  believed.  The  two 
sections  of  the  positive  evidence.  First,  that  outside  of  the  Gospel 
narrative.  The  witness  of  the  sacraments  to  the  resurrection,  and 
that  of  S.  Paul.  The  divergences  in  the  Gospels  explained.  Each 
evangelist  setting  forth  a  different  side  of  Christ's  nature  and 
offices  naturally  records  those  incidents  of  the  resurrection  which 
illustrate  his  particular  theme.  The  witness  of  the  women  and  of 
the  grave-clothes  and  -the  Apostles.  Answer  to  a  late  objection. 
The  resurrection  can  not  be  accounted  for  on  the  myth,  or  ghost, 
or  mental  hallucination  theories.  It  is  confirmed  by  the  change 
wrought  in  the  Apostles  and  their  concurrent  testimony  and  the 
Gospel's  power.  The  resurrection  is  in  accord  with  the  grandeur  of 
the  incarnation,  and  confirms  and  illustrates  it 46 

CHAPTER  V. 
CHRIST'S  TEMPTATION. 

How  can  Christ  be  an  example  to  us  if  not  tried  by  temptation  ?  How 
reconcile  His  temptation  with  His  absolute  sinlessness?  The  three 
kinds  of  trial  to  which  He  was  exposed.  How  He  was  under  a  per- 
petual trial.  How  He  was  tried  in  all  portions  of  His  humanity,  — 
body  and  soul,  affections,  moral  and  spiritual  nature.  Consequently 
His  power  of  sympathy  with  us.  How  by  His  victories  virtues  were 
developed  which  were  to  be  extended  in  us.  His  trials  and  sufferings 
were  the  outcome  of  His  love  and  appeal  for  ours  in  return  ...  71 


CONTENTS  xxiii 

CHAPTER  VI. 
ETERNAL  LIFE. 

PACK 

Christ  came  to  consummate  creation  by  uniting  it  to  God  by  a  new  tie. 
His  original  purpose  is  not  baffled  by  man's  sin.  Sin  had  separated 
man  from  God,  made  him  the  servant  of  Satan,  and  marred  his 
nature.  How  Christ  removed  these  evils.  How  He  brought  to  man 
four  great  gifts,  —  truth,  an  example,  deliverance  from  sin  and 
death,  eternal  life.  How  He  opened  His  side  and  communicates 
His  nature  to  us  through  the  sacraments.  How  the  ancient  peoples 
and  the  heathen  could  be  made  partakers  of  Christ  What  the  gift 
of  eternal  life  is,  and  how  it  must  either  be  attained  through  union 
with  Christ  or  lost 86 

CHAPTER  VII. 
LOVE  AND  SERVICE. 

The  three  manifestations  of  love.  Its  welcome.  Its  progress.  Its 
response.  An  examination  of  ourselves.  Contrast  of  our  ingratitude 
and  selfishness  with  His  unselfish  love.  Our  spiritual  life  a  journey. 
Its  purificative,  illuminative,  and  unificative  stages.  The  work  of 
the  Holy  Spirit.  The  call  to  service 105 


PART  II.  —  CATHOLIC. 

CHAPTER  VIII. 
THE  RULE  OF  FAITH. 

The  differences  among  Christians.  How  shall  a  Christian  know  what  he 
ought  to  believe  ?  Two  axioms.  The  three  rules  proposed,  —  the 
Protestant,  Roman,  and  Catholic.  The  tests  applied  to  them.  The 
true  rule  the  Catholic  one.  Christ  speaks  through  His  Church.  It 
is  a  living  voice.  The  four  points  in  the  Catholic  rule.  Christ 
reveals,  the  Holy  Spirit  guards,  the  Church  declares,  the  Christian 
knows.  Answer  to  objection  concerning  the  divisions  of  Christen- 
dom. These  divisions  have  been  a  means  by  which  the  Church's 
prophetical  office  as  an  infallible  guide  has  been  preserved.  The 
Anglican  Church  declaring  the  Catholic  faith  as  held  by  the  undi- 
vided Church  speaks  with  a  living  and  authoritative  voice  ....  127 


xxiv  CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  IX. 
SACRIFICE. 

PACK 

Religion  requires  an  outward  expression  of  worship.  What  is  the  origin 
of  sacrifice  ?  The  sacrifices  of  the  heathen  and  the  Jew.  The  two- 
fold character  of  the  latter,  corporate  and  individual.  The  necessity 
of  the  inward  spirit  with  the  outward  oblation.  The  sacrifice  of 
Christ  embraces  both  and  fulfils  the  types  of  two  orders  of  priest- 
hood. Sacrifice  seen  to  be  a  reciprocal  action  between  God  and 
man.  Hence  no  true  and  complete  religion  without  it.  Shown  to 
exist  in  all  the  four  dispensations.  In  Paradise,  under  the  Law,  in 
the  Kingdom  of  grace,  and  glory.  The  Eucharist  the  Gospel  sacri- 
fice. Answer  to  some  Protestant  objections 148 

V 

CHAPTER   X. 
THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY. 

Worship  by  sacrifice  postulates  the  necessity  of  a  priesthood.  Christ 
held  the  office  of  priest.  Answer  to  objection  that  He  did  not  use 
that  term  in  relation  to  Himself.  The  Church  as  His  mystical  body 
is  identified  with  His  priesthood.  Christ  is  its  head  and  our  High 
Priest.  All  of  its  members,  being  united  in  Him,  are  collectively  a 
priesthood.  How  the  Apostles  were  clothed  with  special  priestly 
powers,  commissioned,  and  finally  consecrated.  How  they  ordained 
others,  and  the  three  orders  of  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons  arose. 
The  members  of  the  second  order,  by  the  powers  given  it,  proved  by 
Holy  Scripture  to  be  priests  in  the  Old  Testament  sense  ....  169 

CHAPTER   XI. 
ANGLICAN  ORDERS. 

The  Anglican  Church  has  always  been  in  possession  of  an  Apostolic 
ministry.  Objections  of  Sectarians  and  of  Romans,  I.  It  is  zprima 
facie  proof  of  the  Anglican  Church  having  orders  that  she  claims 
and  acts  as  if  she  had.  II.  How  the  succession  from  the  Apostles 
has  been  preserved  to  her  through  three  lines  of  descent.  All  Angli- 
can bishops  trace  their  orders  to  Archbishop  Laud,  in  whom  these 
lines  converged.  The  consecration  of  Matthew  Parker  by  four 
bishops  an  admitted  fact  III.  The  validity  of  the  ordinal  by  which 
he  was  consecrated.  The  intention  of  its  framers.  The  preserva- 
tion in  it  of  a  valid  matter  and  form.  The  validity  of  the  orders 
demonstrated 188 


CONTENTS  xxv 

CHAPTER  XII. 
THE  SEVEN  MYSTERIES. 

PACB 

The  sacraments  divided  into  two  classes.  The  seven  separately  ex- 
plained. The  four  Baptisms  in  the  New  Testament.  The  gift  of 
the  spirit  in  confirmation.  The  sacrament  of  penitence.  Its  parts, 
—  contrition,  confession,  absolution.  Holy  unction,  —  its  institution, 
the  blessings  it  conveys,  when  it  may  be  administered.  Holy  Order 
and  matrimony.  Baptism  a  condition  of  Christian  marriage.  The 
indissolubility  of  the  bond.  The  three  kinds  of  Christian  marriage 
and  the  witness  they  severally  bear  to  Christ  and  His  Church.  The 
Holy  Eucharist.  As  a  witness  to  the  faith,  as  a  communion,  as  a 
sacrifice 217 

CHAPTER    XIII. 
UNITY  AND  UNION. 

The  Church  a  spiritual  organism.  The  papacy  not  a  principle  of  unity. 
The  sacramental  union  with  Christ  the  true  principle  of  unity. 
Divine  love,  not  the  papacy,  the  principle  of  the  Church's  union. 
The  present  condition  of  Christendom  foretold  by  type  and  prophecy 
no  ground  of  despondency.  The  duties  Catholics  owe  to  all  parts  of 
the  Church  :  —  the  Church  militant,  to  work  for  it ;  the  Church  ex- 
pectant, to  pray  for  the  dead ;  the  Church  in  glory,  to  unite  our 
prayers  with  its  members  and  make  them  intercessors  while  we  also 
pray  for  them 242 


PART  III.— CATHOLIC,  NOT  ROMAN. 

CHAPTER  XIV. 

S.  PETER'S  PRE-EMINENCE. 

It  must  be  examined  along  with  the  distinctions  given  other  Apostles. 
Three  have  special  titles  given  them.  They  each  have  special  and 
personal  offices.  The  things  said  of  S.  Paul  of  equal  significance  as 
those  said  of  S.  Peter.  The  two  lives  contrasted.  Their  calling. 
Their  part  in  the  establishment  of  the  ministry.  In  regard  to  the 
Church's  discipline.  Their  visions.  The  miracles  they  wrought. 
Their  deliverances  from  prison.  Their  preaching.  Their  salutation 
to  one  another.  Their  deaths.  Their  pre-eminence  and  the  offices 
they  respectively  held  required  no  successors 263 


xxvi  CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  XV. 

S.  PETER  AND  S.  JOHN. 

PACK 

S.  Peter  type  and  representative  of  the  old  dispensation,  S.  John  of  the 
new.  Their  lives  contrasted.  S.  Peter  the  older  and  a  married 
man,  S.  John  the  younger  and  a  virgin.  Their  respective  homes  and 
occupants.  The  different  manner  of  their  call.  The  new  names  or 
titles  given  to  each.  The  meaning  of  Christ's  preaching  out  of 
Peter's  boat.  The  questions  they  respectively  address  to  Christ. 
The  different  rebukes  our  Lord  administers  to  each.  The  questions 
He  addresses  to  them.  The  two  Apostles'  conduct  at  the  Last 
Supper,  judgment  hall,  the  cross,  and  at  the  resurrection.  The 
care  of  the  B.  Virgin,  the  type  of  the  Church,  given  to  S.  John. 
Their  different  deaths  illustrative  of  their  positions  in  the  Church  .  281 

CHAPTER  XVI. 
S.  PETER  AT  ROME. 

The  claim  that  Christ  created,  as  different  from  the  episcopate,  an  office 
of  supreme  pontiff.  Necessity  of  Romans  proving  that  S.  Peter 
not  only  consecrated  a  bishop  at  Rome  but  instituted  him  into  this 
office.  Is  it  a  demonstrated  certainty  or  only  a  historical  probability 
that  Peter  was  at  Rome  ?  The  evidence  is  argumentative  and  cir- 
cumstantial only.  The  Romantic  and  the  Ecclesiastic  accounts. 
No  plain  record  of  it  in  the  Holy  Scriptures.  No  contemporaneous 
witnesses.  The  evidence  of  S.  Clement,  Tertullian,  Eusebius,  and 
others.  Three  comments.  Conclusion.  No  such  evidence  exists 
as  warrants  our  making  "the  Holy  Roman  Church"  an  article  of 
the  Creed 294 

CHAPTER  XVII. 
THE  ROMAN  CLAIM. 

The  pope,  the  vicar  of  Christ,  the  monarch,  supreme  governor,  and 
doctor  of  the  Church.  Printa  facie  evidence  against  this  claim. 
Cannot  be  accounted  for  by  a  development.  The  evidence  of  Holy 
Scripture.  The  authority  vested  in  the  twelve.  Peter  and  the  first 
council.  His  rebuke  by  S.  Paul.  The  three  texts  alleged  by  the 
Romans  interpreted.  Grammatical  and  theological  reasons  why 
Peter  cannot  be  the  rock.  The  testimony  of  the  fathers.  The 
Roman  claim  disproved 304 


CONTENTS  xxvii 

CHAPTER  XVIII. 
THE  HOLY  SEE. 

PAGE 

What  claim  has  Rome  to  this  title?  Some  historical  features  of  that 
see.  The  forgeries  connected  with  its  development.  The  evil 
character  of  many  of  its  pontiffs.  Its  worldly  spirit  and  lust  for 
power.  Its  present  agitation  for  a  temporal  sovereignty.  Contrast 
between  the  spirit  of  its  services  and  that  of  the  Holy  Eastern  Church. 
The  Roman  see  has  no  special  claim  to  holiness;  it  is  rather  the 
worldly  see 330 

CHAPTER  XIX. 
SECESSIONS. 

The  Tractarian  movement.  The  secessions  of  some.  One  cause  the 
difficulties  arising  in  England  from  the  connection  of  the  Church 
with  the  State.  The  number  of  those  clergy  who  have  stayed  larger 
than  that  of  those  who  have  left.  Some  reasons  accounting  for  the 
action  of  many  of  the  latter  class.  What  has  been  the  effect  on  their 
spiritual  lives.  The  sin  of  secession  the  most  terrible  a  Christian 
man  can  commit 343 

CHAPTER  XX. 
ANGLICANISM  AND  REUNION. 

The  continuity  of  the  Anglican  Church.  The  different  schools  within 
her  supplementary  of  each  other.  The  danger  in  each.  Extremes 
working  out  their  own  cure.  Contrast  with  Rome  and  her  struggles. 
Two  great  Providential  blessings,  the  death  of  Edward  VI  and  Pope 
Leo's  denial  of  Anglican  orders.  The  attitude  of  the  East  and  the 
possibility  of  reunion.  Prayer  for  its  restoration 355 


INDEX 369 


Part  One 


CHRISTIAN 


CHRISTIAN  AND  CATHOLIC 


CHAPTER    I 
RELIGION 

LET  me  in  love  put  myself  beside  a  soul  whose 
condition  was  once  my  own.     The  stones  over 
which  one  has  stumbled  may  prove  perhaps  stepping- 
stones  to  another. 

Let  me  begin  with  a  very  rudimentary  inquiry,  — 
What  is  your  definition  of  Religion?  There  have 
been  many  given.  The  one  I  suggest  as  a  working 
hypothesis  is  this,  —  a  personal  union  of  an  intelli- 
gent and  spiritual  nature  with  a  personal  God.  It 
is  somewhat  of  a  large  definition  and  it  involves  these 
three  factors :  God,  man,  and  the  union  between 
them.  Even  if  you  believe  this,  it  will  do  you  no 
harm  to  try  and  grasp  the  following  as  one  of  the 
many  lines  of  argument  which  lead  to  Religion. 

First,  let  us  say  that  we  rejoice  in  all  that  modern 
science  has  demonstrated  and  regard  its  exponents 
as  the  high  priests  of  nature.  They  have  convicted 
the  theologians  of  error  in  holding  to  a  wrong  inter- 
pretation of  scripture  and  believing  in  a  six  days' 
creation.  They  have  unfolded  the  evolutionary  pro- 
cess by  which  man  was  made  from  the  dust  of  the 
earth. 


4  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

Scientific  research  has  tended  more  and  more  to 
the  idea  of  the  unity  of  the  material  universe  and, 
by  its  discovery  of  the  correlation  of  its  forces,  to  the 
oneness  of  the  energy  of  which  it  is  the  expression. 
It  is  not  ordinarily  known  that  the  first  theological 
definition  of  God,  as  given  by  the  schoolmen,  is  that 
of  "  pure  activity."  In  this  science  and  theology 
seemingly  come  into  close  agreement.  The  happy 
discoveries  of  the  last  century  revealed,  moreover, 
the  processes  by  which  the  present  stage  of  material 
perfection  was  attained.  It  has  taken  millions  of 
years.  It  is  like  the  ordered  march  of  a  drama,  or 
a  musical  composition,  to  its  climax.  We  could  as 
well  suppose  a  play  of  Shakespeare's  capable  of 
production  by  the  shaking  together  of  a  million  let- 
ters of  the  alphabet  as  to  suppose  this  world  and 
man  to  have  been  produced  by  a  mere  fortuitous 
collocation  of  material  atoms.  It  is  a  reasonable  de- 
duction that  the  energy  of  which  the  material  world 
is  the  expression,  must  be  an  intelligent  one. 

It  manifests  Itself  as  an  intelligent  Energy,  for  It 
acts  in  an  intelligent  way.  A  noted  unbeliever  once 
said,  if  there  was  a  God  He  ought  to  write  His  Name 
where  men  could  see  it,  on  every  blade  of  grass. 
The  difficulty  would  then  arise,  in  what  language 
should  He  write  it?  Now  there  is  one,  and  one  only, 
universal  language,  and  that  is  mathematics.  And 
God  has  written  His  Name  in  that  language  and 
where  all  men  may  see  it.  There  must  be  like  in- 
telligence employed  in  setting  the  mathematical 
problems  involved  in  the  movement  of  the  stars  as 
in  the  astronomers  who  solve  them.  The  substances 


RELIGION  5 

we  find  in  nature  are  always  the  result  of  an  exact 
mathematical  combination  of  primary  elements.  The 
structure  of  the  world  and  the  universe  is  the  mani- 
festation of  pure  mathematical  thought. 

We  find  also  a  like  token  of  this  intelligence  in  the 
things  beneath  our  feet.  The  ants  and  bees  con- 
struct their  fortress  homes  and  order  their  interior 
construction  with  mechanical  ingenuity  and  statesman- 
like skill,  but  the  little  things  never  thought  out  their 
wonderful  plans.  They  act  mechanically,  in  obedience 
to  an  instinct  they  must  obey.  And  what  is  in- 
stinct? It  is  something  different  from  reason;  for 
as  the  reasoning  powers  develop  in  nature's  work- 
shop, instinct  decays.  So  the  two  things  are  different. 
What  then  is  it?  It  is  Wisdom  in  action.  It  is  the 
Intelligent  Energy  that  pulsates  throughout  the  world. 
Again,  the  skill  that  so  forms  and  paints  the  flowers 
as  thereby  to  allure  the  bees  within  their  honeyed 
traps  and  make  them,  despite  themselves,  fertilizing 
agents  of  fresh  life,  comes  not  from  the  flowers,  for 
they  have  no  minds  to  think  with,  but  is  the  expres- 
sion of  that  same  Mind  that  guides  unerringly  the 
planets  in  their  courses,  and  moves  in  insects,  bees, 
and  ants,  and  paints  the  flowers,  and  dwells  in  man  as 
well.  We  are  in  the  presence,  science  and  philosophy 
attest,  of  an  Energy  Eternal  and  Intelligent. 

This  Energy,  because  it  is  also  an  Eternal  Energy, 
must  be  a  Will. 

This  may  require  a  little  more  attention  than  the 
former  point. 

First,  it  is  evident  that  this  Energy  must  be  an 
Eternal  one,  because  something  must  always  have 


6  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

existed.  For  if  something  has  not  always  existed 
then  once  nothing  existed.  If  once  absolutely  nothing 
existed,  then  this  world  could  never  have  come  into 
existence,  for  out  of  nothing  nothing  comes.  But 
from  the  fact  that  we  ourselves  know  ourselves  to 
be*  we  are  compelled  to  believe  something  has  always 
existed. 

Now  what  is  this  something?  It  cannot  be  a  mere 
unintelligent  physical  energy,  i.e.,  the  action  of  atoms 
acting  on  atoms.  Because  all  such  continued  move- 
ments require  in  every  instance  some  antecedent 
movement.  So-called  spontaneous  action  is  only  the 
result  in  some  way  of  antecedent  co-operative  or 
preparatory  activity.  Now  the  something  which  is 
an  Eternal  activity  cannot  be  of  that  kind  that 
requires  perpetually  an  antecedent,  as  all  the  move- 
ments of  matter  do.  Such  movements  as  are  depend- 
ent on  antecedent  actions  are  caused,  whereas  what  is 
Eternal  cannot  be  dependent  on  any  antecedent  and 
so  must  be  uncaused. 

We  may  make  this  clearer  by  an  anecdote.  Once 
a  scholar  came  to  his  Indian  teacher  and  said, 
"  Father,  what  does  this  great  world  rest  on?"  "  It 
rests,  my  son,  on  the  back  of  the  giant  Atlas  who 
stands  upon  the  Turtle."  "  And  what,  father,  does 
the  Turtle  rest  on?  "  "  The  Turtle,  my  son,  rests  on 
a  great  rock."  "  And,  father,  what  does  the  rock 
rest  on?"  "Why,"  said  the  teacher,  somewhat 
impatiently,  "  the  rock  rests  on  another  rock." 
"  And,  father,  dear,  what  does  that  other  rock  rest 
on?"  "You  little  fool,"  said  the  perplexed  and 
irritated  teacher,  "  there  are  rocks  all  the  way  down." 


RELIGION  7 

Where  one  thing  rests  on  another,  or  one  act 
necessarily  precedes  another,  as  in  a  chain  of  physical 
causation,  a  fresh  antecedent  is  ever  being  demanded. 
Now  that  which  requires  an  antecedent  or  a  begin- 
ning cannot  be  eternal,  for  anything  to  be  eternal 
must  have  no  antecedent  or  beginning.  "An  endless 
chain  of  physical  causation  is  unthinkable." 

An  Eternal  Energy  must  then  be  a  self-caused  or 
self-moved  Energy,  in  other  words  a  self-existing, 
self-acting  Will.  "  Conscious  Volition,"  it  has  been 
said,  "  is  the  ultimate  source  of  all  force." 

This  leads  on  to  another  truth.  The  Intelligent 
Will-Energy  must  be  a  person. 

When  it  is  said  that  God  is  a  person,  some  have 
replied,  "  I  can  go  so  far  with  you  as  to  believe  in  an 
Intelligent  Will  and  Power  developing  the  universe, 
but  I  cannot  conceive  of  It  as  a  person."  When 
one  comes  to  find  out  what  they  object  to,  it  is  the 
notion  that  God  is  a  great  Being  living  somewhere  in 
the  sky  and  who  from  a  distant  throne  looks  down  upon 
the  earth.  They  have  some  such  conception  of  person 
as  is  embodied  in  those  unreal  pictures  which  represent 
the  blessed  Trinity  as  consisting  of  three  individuals. 
They  confound  the  notion  of  person  with  that  of  an 
individual.  Now  God  is  not  an  individual.  He 
is  not,  as  that  word  expresses,  one  of  a  kind.  But 
He  is  a  Person.  For  surely  if  He  is  possessed  of  In- 
telligence He  knows  Himself  to  be.  If  He  does  this 
He  is  a  person,  for  self-consciousness  is  personality. 

Pantheism  has,  in  its  objection  to  Theism,  maintained 
that  the  ideas  "  Absolute  "  and  "  Personal "  are  con- 
tradictory. It  does  this  on  the  ground  that  person- 


8  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

ality  is  founded  on  the  distinction  between  self  and 
non-self.  If  it  were,  then  self,  it  is  obvious,  would  be 
limited  by  that  which  is  not-self.  But  limitation  is 
inconsistent  with  what  is  Absolute  and  so  it  is  con- 
cluded the  Absolute,  or  God,  is  not  a  person.  But 
as  an  abler  philosophy,  by  Lotze  and  others,  has 
pointed  out,  "  Personality  "  is  not  founded  on  the  dis- 
tinction between  self  and  non-self.  It  is  based  on 
"  self-subsistence  which  self-consciousness  affirms." 
It  does  this  without  any  reference  to  that  which  is 
not-self.  You  know  you  are,  without  reference  to  any 
one  else.  Therefore,  personality  is  not  a  limitation  of 
being.  So  far  as  it  deserves  the  name  of  limitation, 
it  is  j^-limitation,  and  "  self-limitation  is  inseparable 
from  a  complete  nature."  "  The  Infinite  and  Eternal 
Power  "  may  be,  as  Herbert  Spencer  is  reported  to 
have  said,  "  beyond  what  our  words  imply,"  but  being 
necessarily  self-conscious  He  is  a  Person.  Thus  our 
natural  reason  leads  us  to  believe  there  is  a  Personal 
God. 

But  a  merely  intellectual  assent  to  this  fact  will  be 
to  us  of  no  more  moral  benefit  than  our  belief  in  a 
proposition  of  Euclid.  What  we  need  is  not  only  to 
believe  there  is  a  God,  but  to  know  Him. 

How  can  we  arrive  at  this  knowledge?  There 
is  a  distinction,  which  is  often  overlooked,  between 
"  believing  "  and  "  knowing."  Man  has  a  reasoning 
faculty  that  enables  him  within  certain  limits  to  arrive 
at  belief  in  religious  matters.  This  belief  is  based  on 
the  preponderating  weight  of  arguments.  We  be- 
lieve what  seems  most  probable.  An  examination, 
however,  of  man  shows  that  besides  having  a  rational 


RELIGION  9 

mind  he  has  a  spiritual  and  related  nature.  It  is  by 
virtue  of  this  relativity  and  spirituality  he  knows. 
We  are  not  saying  that  man  is  born  with  innate  ideas 
or  intuitions.  Innate  ideas  require  words  and  man 
is  not  born  with  words.  But  the  way  his  intellectual 
and  spiritual  nature  works  shows  that  it  works  in 
union  with  an  intellectual  and  spiritual  nature  other 
than  his  own.  Just  as  his  body  cannot  stand  up- 
right save  in  union  with  its  atmospheric  environ- 
ment, so  his  mental  and  spiritual  faculties  do  not  act 
rightly  save  in  union  with  the  Eternal  Intelligence 
and  Will. 

This  union  is  proved  to  us  by  one  fact  among 
many,  that  man  finds  himself  by  his  nature  knowing 
more  than  his  reason  can  prove.  He  knows,  and  no 
argument  can  alter  his  conviction,  that  there  is  a 
world  external  to  himself,  though  his  reason  alone 
cannot  prove  it.  He  is  forced  to  reason  according 
to  syllogistic  laws,  which  he  did  not  make  for  him- 
self and  can  no  more  alter  than  the  laws  which  govern 
his  digestion.  He  believes  as  certain  and  acts  upon 
the  universality  of  law,  which  his  reason  and  experi- 
ence alone  cannot  prove.  He  has  a  sense  of  right  and 
wrong,  of  happiness  when  he  does  right  and  its  loss' 
when  he  does  wrong,  which  is  independent  of  his 
mental  reasonings.  The  solution  of  all  this  is  that 
his  intellectual  powers  and  thinkings  are  connected 
in  their  operation  with  the  Great-Thought  Thinking- 
"  The  natural  light  of  reason,"  S.  Thomas  says,  "  is 
itself  a  certain  participation  of  the  divine  Light." 
"  Our  own  existence,  that  of  the  world,  of  the  moral 
law  of  God,"  wrote  Bishop  Alexander,  of  Derry,  "  are 


io  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

given  us  in  postulates  prior  to  proof."  And  what 
men  call  conscience  is  not  a  judgment  of  the  under- 
standing nor  an  independent  faculty,  but  is  the  action 
of  our  spiritual  nature  "  knowing  together  "  with  God. 

A  little  child  was  playing  in  a  garden,  and,  in  child- 
like mischief,  poking  with  a  stick  a  poor  little  toad. 
Presently  he  put  down  the  stick  and  came  to  his 
mother,  and  sitting  in  her  lap  told  her  that  as  he  was 
poking  the  toad  something  in  him  said,  "  Don't." 
"What  was  it?"  "My  child,"  said  his  mother, 
"some  persons  call  it  conscience;  I  call  it  God." 

Rightly,  then,  as  we  trust  our  reason  acting  in  its 
province,  so  we  must  trust  our  spiritual  nature  in  its 
sphere.  For  as  by  our  reason  we  are  led  to  believe 
there  is  a  God,  so  by  the  action  of  our  spiritual 
nature  He  comes  to  be  known. 

From  this  consideration  of  man's  nature  we  may 
learn  two  things:  what  Religion  is,  and  what  is  its 
origin. 

Religion  is  not  generated  from  non-religious  ele- 
ments, such  as  the  appearance  of  departed  ancestors 
in  dreams,  or  from  the  imagination  which  sees  ghostly 
forms  in  shadowy  clouds  or  waving  trees.  It  is  some- 
thing universal.  It  belongs  to  the  nature  of  man.  It 
would  be  strange  indeed  if  God  did  not  thus  reveal 
Himself  to  His  intelligent  creature.  For  if  He  did 
not,  creation  would  be,  not  only  an  inexplicable  act, 
but  it  would  be  an  immoral  one. 

The  reply  to  the  question  what  is  Religion  is  seen 
then  to  be  this :  It  is  a  union  between  man  and 
God. 

There  are  three  different  degrees  of  union  between 


RELIGION  1 1 

man  and  God.  These  are  by  the  ways  of  nature, 
grace,  and  glory.  The  last  two  will  engage  our  at- 
tention later.  We  are  now  dwelling  on  the  first  of 
these, — union  by  the  way  of  nature.  All  things  are 
united  to  God  and  sustained  by  His  power.  From 
the  tiniest  seed  sporule  to  the  most  developed  organ- 
ism, from  the  ferns  waving  their  unspoken  flowers  to 
the  oak  in  its  triumphant  strength,  from  the  coral  sea- 
hidden  palaces  teeming  with  industrious  life,  to  life 
developing  upward  in  conquering  intellectual  strength, 
God,  in  the  language  of  our  modern  thought,  is  im- 
manent in  nature  though  He  transcends  it.  In  the 
language  of  Browning,  our  philosophical  Christian 
poet, 

"  God  dwells  in  all, 

From  life's  minute  beginnings,  up  at  last 
To  man  —  the  consummation  of  this  scheme 
Of  being  —  the  completion  of  this  sphere 
Of  life." 

The  same  truth  is  embodied  in  the  old  Latin  hymn 
said  daily  at  nones :  — 

"  O  God,  creation's  secret  force, 
Thyself  unmoved,  all  motion's  source." 

God's  immanence  in  nature  has  always  been  a  familiar 
thought  to  the  Church.  "  God,"  S.  Gregory  said, 
"  dwelleth  within  all  things,  without  all  things." 

While  recognizing  God's  immanence  we.  do  well, 
however,  not  to  fall  into  either  one  of  two  errors. 
There  are  some  who  hold  that  created  things  have  no 
real  existence,  for  uncreated  Spirit  alone  is  "Being." 
There  is  a  truth  and  an  untruth  in  this.  All  that 


12  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

God  has  created  stands  in  two  separate  relations, 
one  to  God  and  one  to  themselves.  In  its  relation  to 
God  nothing  made  is  possessed  of  independent  or 
substantial  life.  In  the  relation  created  things  stand 
to  each  other  they  are  correlated  realities.  Thus, 
matter  is  to  us  a  true  category,  and  pain  or  matter 
in  disorder  is  something  actual  or  real.  The  other 
error  does  not  recognize  God's  transcendence  of 
nature.  Its  postulate  is  that  creation  was  a  necessity 
of  God's  own  life.  This  could  not  be,  seeing  the 
Eternal  and  Infinite  must  be  identical  with  the  Ab- 
solute, and  so  God  is  complete  in  Himself.  The 
Christian  religion  explains  to  us  this  completeness 
and  also  the  beatitude  of  which  God  is  possessed. 
For  the  ever  Blessed  Trinity  having  in  Himself  as 
Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  the  perfect  object  and 
complete  return  of  His  own  love,  is  thereby  relieved 
from  the  otherwise  intolerable  misery  of  solitariness. 
But  if  creation  is  a  necessitated  action,  God  is  neither 
complete  in  Himself  nor  possessed  of  satisfying  per- 
fection and  bliss.  Moreover,  a  necessitated  creative 
action  would  involve  an  emanation  of  His  own  nature, 
and,  logically,  being  a  necessary  act  it  would  be  an 
eternal  one.  The  outcome  of  this  is  Pantheism.  It 
would  also  make  God  not  a  permitter,  but  the  author 
of  evil ;  for  in  the  Pantheistic  system  whatever  sin 
is  committed,  it  is  God  Himself  who  sins. 

The  more  rational  view  is  thus  expressed  by  Pusey, 
one  of  modern  England's  greatest  theologians  and 
saints :  — 

"  God  is  Omnipresent,  that  is,  everywhere.  Our  earthly 
substances  do  not  shut  out  God.  God's  way  of  being  is 


RELIGION  13 

wholly  different  from  ours.  It  is  not  with  God  as  when  we 
build  a  house  and  part  off  what  is  without  the  house  from 
what  is  within,  so  that  God  should  be  shut  out  by  the  works 
of  His  Own  Hands.  He  is  above  them  ;  without  them, 
within  them ;  not  a  part  of  them,  not  intermingled  with 
them,  not  confused  with  them  ;  nor  are  they  part  of  Him  ; 
yet  they  hinder  not  His  presence.  He  is  not  in  one  way 
within  them,  and  in  another  way  without ;  but  one  and  the 
same  God  wholly  everywhere.  He  does  not  fill  one  part 
with  Himself,  and  another  with  another  part  of  Himself;  but 
is  one  and  the  same  in  all." 

In  the  lately  discovered  "  Sayings  of  Jesus,"  it  is 
found  written,  "Jesus  saith,  wherever  there  are  (two) 
they  are  not  without  God,  and  wherever  there  is  one 
alone,  I  say,  I  am  with  him.  Raise  the  stone  and 
there  shalt  thou  find  Me ;  cleave  the  wood  and  there 
am  I." 

The  conclusion  seems  to  be  that  the  All  is  not 
God  though  God  is  in  All. 

This  mode  of  union,  however,  does  not  make  God 
the  author  of  sin,  for  man  is  a  free  agent.  Nor  does 
the  aspect  of  nature,  "  red  in  tooth  and  claw,"  dis- 
prove God's  goodness.  Before  man's  advent  the 
predatory  animals  lived  on  each  other,  as  man  now 
lives  on  them.  But  by  this  union  between  man  and 
God,  man  may,  if  he  will,  come  the  better  to  know 
God.  Nature  will  be  to  him  but  a  Velamen  Domini, 
beneath  whose  folds  of  beauty  he  will  discern  the 
movements  of  the  Almighty.  Nature  will  be  to  him 
a  great  Cathedral  where,  alone  on  mountain  tops  or 
in  the  woods  or  by  the  sea,  in  the  gladsome  hum  of 
insect  life  or  multitudinous  laughter  of  the  waves  or 


14  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

message-laden  woods,  he  may  listen  to  the  hidden 
Mind  articulate  in  nature's  song  of  life.  It  develops 
into  a  chorus  of  correlated  power,  a  symphonic  har- 
mony of  law.  "  And  of  Law  there  can  be  no  less 
acknowledged  than  that  her  seat  is  the  bosom  of  God, 
her  voice  the  harmony  of  the  world."  Overpowered 
by  God's  greatness  and  his  own  littleness,  man  feels 
himself  to  be  like  a  tiny  insect  that  can  but  rub  its 
wings  together  and  make  one  utterance  of  praise,  or 
cry  for  help. 

But  with  every  effort  union  grows  and  light  flows 
into  the  soul.  Our  faces  must  be  turned  heavenward 
if  they  are  to  reflect  His.  He  cometh  silently  as  light, 
unseen  as  sound.  He  cometh  gently  as  the  dew  upon 
the  earth.  We  must  watch  the  promptings  of  our 
better  nature,  and  by  response  learn  their  author. 
We  must  speak  to  Him  in  prayer  if  we  would  have 
Him  speak  to  us.  For  by  prayer  our  nature  is  trained 
in  communion  with  His,  and  by  obedience  we  become 
conscious  of  His  guiding  will. 

Let  one  only  begin  to  seek  God  and  he  shall  find 
Him.  He  sha]l  also  find  that  religion  brings  an  in- 
crease of  strength  and  joy.  It  comes  to  man  laden 
with  both  these  blessings.  It  brings  to  him  an 
increase  of  strength,  because  he  becomes  thereby  the 
better  master  of  his  nature.  All  his  faculties  work 
more  harmoniously  with  each  other  and  in  the  true 
order  of  their  subordination.  For  each  department 
of  our  nature  to  work  at  its  best,  the  body  must  be 
subordinated  to  the  soul,  and  the  soul  to  the  spirit. 
So  does  the  body  work  more  healthily,  the  soul  more 
wisely,  the  spirit  with  a  higher  power  of  usefulness. 


RELIGION  15 

The  religious  man  becomes  a  freeman,  emancipated 
from  the  thraldom  of  passion,  more  than  owner  of 
himself,  a  monarch  crowned. 

Increase  of  strength  also  is  his,  because  he  lives  and 
works  in  conscious  union  with  God.  He  has  not 
"  hitched,"  as  Emerson  said,  "  his  destiny  to  a  star," 
but  to  God,  and  God  dwelleth  in  him  and  he  in  God. 
He  has  set  his  mill  on  the  Rock,  and  the  river  of  God 
forever  turns  his  wheels.  He  has  the  courage  to  do 
and  endure ;  to  do  right  because  it  is  right,  whatever 
the  cost  may  be;  to  endure  bravely  the  ills  of  life,  for 
he  is  given  a  strength  not  his  own.  Poverty  may 
come  with  its  gaunt  visage  and  pinching  grip,  sickness 
with  its  weariness  and  pain,  disappointment  breaking 
the  crystal  vase  of  love,  and  separations  that  seem  to 
wipe  out  from  earth  all  that  makes  earth  dear.  But 
like  the  three  children  in  the  midst  of  the  fiery  fur- 
nace, he  has  for  his  support  One  walking  with  him  in 
the  flames,  Whose  countenance  is  like  that  of  the  Son 
of  God. 

Besides  the  strength  religion  gives,  it  brings  a  joy. 
The  religious  man  is  in  the  possession  of  peace,  in 
the  conscious  development  of  growth,  in  the  satisfac- 
tion of  his  highest  faculties,  and  in  the  enjoyment  of 
life.  For  it  alone  makes  life  worth  living.  It  adds 
something  to  every  earthly  pleasure.  To  the  relig- 
ious eye  the  earth  ever  takes  on  new  beauties.  The 
sun  shines  more  joyfully  into  the  humblest  cabin,  and 
God  blesses  all  His  gifts  to  His  children. 

There  are  presentations  of  religion,  that  seemingly 
ignore  all  earthly  enjoyment.  Matter  is  regarded  as 
the  source  of  all  evil,  and  man's  nature  as  totally  de- 


16  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

praved.  Religion  does  not  come  to  bless  man  here, 
but  chiefly  to  save  his  soul.  Such  were  the  Puritans. 
They  were  men  of  grim  and  dour  countenance.  They 
denied  themselves  all  pastimes,  amusements,  recrea- 
tions. Things  innocent  in  themselves  were  denounced 
as  sins  or  marks  of  a  carnal  state.  They  turned  Sun- 
day into  a  day  of  penance,  a  weariness  to  men,  and  an 
intolerable  bore  to  children. 

But  the  Church  teaches  us  that  all  that  God  has 
made  is  good,  that  matter  is  not  evil,  that  while  we 
are  not  to  let  our  appetites  run  riot,  God  gave  them 
and  takes  delight  in  their  right  exercise.  God  desires 
His  children  to  be  happy,  and  religion  comes  to  bless 
and  sanctify  every  enjoyment.  To  the  true  child  of 
God  all  nature  speaks  of  Him.  Home  is  a  different 
thing  to  him.  Wife  and  children  are  better  loved. 
Friendships  are  stronger  and  more  unselfish.  Re- 
ligion fills  him  with  joy,  and  its  joy  is  renewed  day  by 
day.  It  is  like  the  fabled  music  that  issued  from 
Memnon's  Tower,  that  day  by  day  welcomed  the 
coming  dawn.  It  reveals  to  man  a  heavenly  Father 
whose  delight  is  to  be  with  the  children  of  men. 


CHAPTER    II 
HEAVEN'S  AMBASSADOR 

THE  revelation  of  Himself  which  God  primarily 
makes  in  nature  and  man,  He  has  given  more 
fully  to  the  race  through  philosophers,  poets,  seers, 
in  all  lands  and  times,  unfolding  more  and  more  His 
divine  purpose,  man's  destiny  and  His  Love.  Soaring 
above  their  fellows  like  great  mountain  tops,  these 
chiefs  among  men  first  caught  the  rays  of  the  coming 
day. 

It  has  been  a  gradual  and  progressive  revelation 
adapted  to  the  races'  childhood,  maturity,  needs. 
God  gave  to  different  nations  their  separate  work  in 
the  progress  of  humanity.  He  overruled  their  an- 
tagonisms and  their  successions  in  power.  He  gave 
to  each  a  special  mission.  He  made  Israel  the  world's 
religious  lighthouse.  He  made  the  Hebrew  prophets 
the  organs  of  the  revelation  of  His  Oneness.  There 
were  not,  as  pagans  held,  gods  of  the  rivers  and  of  the 
mountains  and  of  the  plains.  The  Olympian  deities 
of  man's  creation  had  no  existence.  "  The  Lord  thy 
God  is  one  God."  This  was  Israel's  message.  It  was 
something  more.  The  childish  idea  of  God  is  a  God 
of  power,  a  God  Almighty.  In  apprehension  the 
quantitative  precedes  the  qualitative.  The  earlier 
man-created  deities  were  thus  gods  of  force.  They 
hurled  vast  mountains  together,  forged  fated  armor, 


i8  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

ruled  the  bellowing  clouds,  and  on  bent  shoulders 
upheld  the  world.  But  Israel's  God  was  not  only  the 
Almighty  One.  He  was  the  God  of  Truth  and 
Righteousness.  The  Indian  Law  of  Karma,  the  Greek 
Nemesis,  issued  from  His  judgment  seat.  He  pun- 
ished the  guilty.  He  watched  over  the  oppressed. 
But  He  ordereth  all  to  ends  beyond  any  individual's 
rights  or  needs,  for  He  was  for  all  and  over  all.  He 
was  the  God  for  all  time  and  of  all  people.  The  mark 
of  limitation,  showing  its  transitory  character,  rested 
on  all  pagan  worship.  It  was  so  bound  up  with  cer- 
tain nationalities  that  it  could  never  have  a  universal 
application.  But  the  revelation  of  Israel  not  only 
declared  the  Oneness  of  God  but  foretold  its  own 
development.  It  enshrined  the  great  prophecy  of  a 
Teacher  to  whom  all  nations  would  come.  A  light 
was  to  break  forth  as  the  sun  from  the  clouds  and 
illumine  the  world.  With  man's  advancing  prepara- 
tion, the  daylight  gradually  increased,  and  at  last  that 
fuller  light  came  in  the  person  of  Jesus  Christ 

Before,  however,  considering  Him  we  must  recog- 
nize the  fact  that  religion,  being  an  element  of  our 
nature,  presents  itself  in  several  forms  besides  that  of 
Christianity. 

We  can  but  pause  here  to  remark  how  its  revelation 
of  God,  man's  destiny,  and  the  aids  it  brings,  denotes 
its  superiority.  It  has  elevated  and  enriched  man- 
kind more  than  any  other  religion.  It  has  been  an 
invigorating  force  in  man's  progressive  elevation. 
Under  its  benign  influence  slavery  has  been  abolished, 
the  horrors  of  war  have  been  mitigated,  woman  has 
risen  in  position  and  dignified  companionship.  Multi- 


HEAVEN'S   AMBASSADOR  19 

form  philanthropies  have  extended  their  alleviating 
blessings  into  every  byway  of  human  misery.  It  has 
enriched  man's  intellect  and  been  the  mother  of  art. 
It  has  left  an  ennobling  impress  on. the  character  of 
every  Christian  nation  in  Europe.  It  has  tended  to 
the  unity  of  the  human  family,  and  made  man  more 
considerate  of  the  rights  of  his  brother  man.  In  its 
principles  are  to  be  found  the  only  solution  for  the  de- 
structive contests  between  labor  and  capital.  Christ 
was  not,  as  some  modern  socialists  have  declared,  a 
failure.  He  was  not  a  mere  ideal  philanthropist 
preaching  an  impractical  religion.  He  set  in  motion 
an  agency  for  the  benefit  of  mankind  which  has 
achieved  a  permanent  success,  and  is  extending  itself 
with  a  self-productive  energy.  He  has  revealed  and 
made  possible  an  elevation  of  man  in  a  final  union 
with  God  beyond  aught  that  any  other  religion  has 
conceived.  Christianity  offers  an  end  to  man,  beyond 
that  of  any  scheme  of  human  progress,  an  end  worthy 
of  God  and  most  ennobling  to  man. 

It  presents  us  with  the  noblest  conception  of  God, 
as  not  only  an  Almighty  and  Omnipresent  Being, 
but  as  Wisdom,  Goodness,  Love,  Beauty  itself.  It 
represents  Him  not  as  a  merely  ever-existing  Ancient 
of  Days,  but  as  Eternal  Youth.  It  condemns  Him 
not  to  the  misery  of  an  eternal  solitude,  but  reveals 
Him  as  having,  in  the  self-consciousness  of  each  of  His 
necessary  eternal  activities,  of  Being,  Knowing,  Lov- 
ing, a  triple  personality,  so  that  He  has  ever  an 
adequate  object  and  return  to  His  own  Infinite  Love. 
It  solves  best  the  purpose  of  creation  by  the  revela- 
tion of  its  destined  progress  to  the  evolution  of  a  new 


20  CHRISTIAN   AND    CATHOLIC 

heaven  and  earth  from  which  all  evil  and  sin  shall  be 
forever  banished.  It  explains  best  the  permission  of 
temptation  with  its  consequent  evils  in  this  preparatory 
stage,  as  necessary  to  the  development  of  the  charac- 
ter of  a  nature  endowed  with  free  will.  It  offers  the 
highest  conceivable  end  to  man  in  the  attainment  of 
such  a  further  union  with  God,  as,  without  destroying 
his  personality,  will  secure  him  in  permanent  right- 
eousness and  consequently  everlasting  bliss.  It  comes 
to  him  with  a  free  offer  of  pardon  for  all  his  errors 
and  sins,  a  blotting  out  of  the  guilty  past,  an  elevation 
and  transformation  of  his  nature,  fitting  it  for  eternal 
glory.  It  sets  all  this  before  him,  in  and  through 
union  with  Christ. 

And  so  we  come  to  a  question  it  behooves  us  to 
seriously  consider.  It  was  a  question  once  put  by 
the  great  Master  Himself.  "  What  think  ye  of  Christ?  " 
If  you  think  at  all  favorably  about  Christianity,  what 
do  you  think  of  its  Founder?  Nothing  is  more 
certain  than  that  Jesus  Christ  lived  in  Palestine  and 
was  publicly  put  to  death  there  by  the  Roman  gov- 
ernor. It  is  as  certain  as  the  life  and  death  of  any 
recorded  in  history,  as  that  of  Socrates  or  Julius 
Caesar  or  Abraham  Lincoln.  "  Not  to  be  interested 
in  the  life  of  Jesus  Christ  is  to  be,"  said  Liddon,  "  I 
do  not  say  irreligious,  but  unintelligent.  It  is  to  be 
insensible  to  the  nature  and  claim  of  the  most  power- 
ful force  that  has  ever  moulded  the  thought  and 
swayed  the  destinies  of  civilized  man."  Listening, 
at  St.  Helena,  to  the  bells  that  called  to  church 
attendance  on  Sunday,  Napoleon  said  he  recognized 
in  Christ  a  power  greater  than  he  or  any  of  the 


HEAVEN'S   AMBASSADOR  21 

world's  conquerors  possessed.  A  modern  French 
orator,  speaking  of  the  motive  forces  of  late  centuries, 
how  liberty  had  been  the  watchword  of  the  eigh- 
teenth century  and  progress  that  of  the  nineteenth, 
exclaimed,  "  But,  gentlemen,  Jesus  Christ  is  Progress." 
By  the  acclaim  which  all  nations  have  accorded  Him, 
He  stands  as  a  Religious  Teacher,  matchless  and 
supreme.  If  we  accept  this  in  any  fair  degree,  we 
may  well  ask  ourselves,  what  has  given  Him  this 
pre-eminence,  and  what  are  His  credentials  for  it? 

The  first  characteristic  concerning  Him,  and  that 
differentiates  Him  from  all  other  of  the  world's 
renowned  religious  teachers,  is  that  He  came  as  the 
fulfilment  of  prophecy.  In  this  He  is  unique. 
Modern  critical  research  may  show  us  how  the  Bible 
grew  into  its  present  shape.  It  may  show  us  how 
many  were  its  writers  or  redactors.  How,  as  it  inti- 
mates, in  its  composition  they  used  ancient  myths  and 
legends.  How  they  made  selections  from  various 
sources.  How  they  rewrote  history.  The  Bible 
ends  in  a  revelation  of  the  wonderful  mystery  of 
Grace  and  Glory,  just  as  it  begins  with  an  inspired 
allegory  which  sets  forth  the  mystery  of  Creation, 
But  all  the  way  through  there  is  from  the  beginning 
to  the  end  of  the  Old  Testament  the  promise  of  a 
Messiah  who  shall  enlighten  and  redeem  Mankind. 

In  the  light  of  that  wonderful  revelation  wherein 
we  first  learn  of  man's  relation  to  His  Maker  and  the 
dire  results  of  separating  himself  from  God,  we  read 
also  of  man's  promised  Deliverer.  One  would  come 
who  should  "  bruise  the  serpent's  head."  God  put 
man  outside  of  the  garden  where  he  had  access  to 


22  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

the  Tree  of  Life,  to  teach  him  that  sin  separates  from 
God.  Separation  indeed  from  God's  power  man 
cannot  accomplish,  for  that  were  to  annihilate  himself; 
and  annihilation  would  be  an  act  of  omnipotence 
equal  to  creation  itself.  Man  can,  however,  separate 
himself  from  the  Grace  of  God,  and  to  do  this  is  to 
bring  upon  himself  spiritual  death.  Of  this  God  lov- 
ingly forewarned  him.  "  In  the  day  thou  eatest  thereof 
thou  shalt  surely  die."  Given  the  possibility,  to  pass 
after  trial  into  a  state  of  secured  sinlessness  and  so 
bliss,  man  lost  the  special  grace  by  which  alone  that 
supernatural  end  could  be  secured.  This  grace  being 
a  superadded  gift  to  his  nature,  when  forfeited,  man 
could  not  regain  the  prize  he  had  lost.  A  super- 
natural end  cannot  be  attained  by  natural  effort. 
The  flaming  Cherubim  of  Righteousness  and  Justice 
stood  guard  over  the  sacred  way.  But  a  Deliverer 
coming  for  man  and  as  man,  could  retrieve  man's 
defeat,  and  for  human  nature,  win  its  re-entrance  into 
paradise  and  its  renewed  union  with  God. 

"  O  loving  wisdom  of  our  God  ! 

When  all  was  sin  and  shame 
A  second  Adam  to  the  fight 

And  to  the  rescue  came. 
O  Wisest  love !  that  flesh  and  blood 

Which  did  in  Adam  fail 
Should  strive  afresh  against  the  foe, 

Should  strive  and  should  prevail." 

The  promise  that  a  Deliverer  should  come  is  next 
narrowed  by  promise  that  he  shall  be  of  a  particular 
race.  He  shall  be  of  the  seed  of  Abraham.  "  In  thy 
seed  shall  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  be  blessed." 


HEAVEN'S   AMBASSADOR  23 

This  S.  Peter  quoted  on  the  day  of  Pentecost  as 
applicable  to  Christ,  whom  S.  Matthew  tells  us  was 
descended  from  Abraham.  The  same  promise  was 
renewed  to  Jacob,  who  by  like  authority  is  recorded 
as  the  ancestor  of  Christ.  Subsequently  it  was  fur- 
ther narrowed  to  a  tribe.  He  was  to  come  of  the 
tribe  of  Judah.  Then  as  God  in  guarded  wisdom 
revealed  His  purpose,  a  special  family  was  designated. 
The  Messiah  was  to  be  a  rod  out  of  the  stem  of  Jesse. 
The  Lord  also  declared  to  David  that  He  would 
"  establish  his  throne  for  ever  "  ;  and  this  promise  the 
Angel  Gabriel  quoted  to  the  Blessed  Virgin  concern- 
ing her  offspring,  saying,  "  The  Lord  God  shall  give 
unto  Him  the  Throne  of  His  father  David :  and  of 
His  Kingdom  there  shall  be  no  end." 

His  threefold  offices  also  were  prophetically  set 
forth;  slowly  God  drew  the  .portrait  of  the  coming 
One.  He  was  to  be  a  prophet  like  unto  Moses,  the 
great  leader  of  Israel  out  of  bondage :  "  The  Lord  thy 
God  will  raise  up  unto  thee  a  prophet  like  unto  me, 
unto  whom  ye  shall  hearken."  Of  this  special  prophet, 
unlike  all  others  and  for  whom  the  nation  looked,  the 
Pharisees  made  inquiry  of  John  Baptist,  "  Was  he  that 
prophet?"  To  this  promise  S.  Peter  and  S.  Ste- 
phen both  appealed,  and  claimed  that  Jesus  was  that 
prophet  that  should  come  into  the  world.  He  was  no 
mere  teacher  revealing  truths,  but  a  mighty  leader 
like  unto  Moses.  So  He  came  to  the  Jewish  sheep- 
fold  and  led  His  people  out  from  Judaism  into  the 
broader  Christian  pastures  and  the  brighter  day. 

It  was  also  prophesied  that  the  Great  Deliverer 
should  wear  the  vestment  and  character  of  a  priest. 


24  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

He  should  be  a  high  priest  for  ever  after  the  order  of 
Melchisedek.  The  order  of  Melchisedek  was  a  priest- 
hood unlike  that  of  Aaron,  in  that  it  had  an  assigned 
supernatural  descent.  The  person  of  Melchisedek  ap- 
pears as  a  mysterious  figure  upon  the  stage  of  history. 
He  was  as  if  a  supernatural  being  without  father, 
without  mother.  The  writer  of  Genesis  omits,  perhaps 
by  ignorance  or  forgetfulness,  his  genealogy.  It  is  an 
interesting  and  instructive  instance  of  how  God  makes 
use  even  of  the  ignorance  and  imperfection  of  His 
creatures  to  declare  His  message.  The  omission 
was  an  inspired  mistake.  Thereby  was  set  forth  the 
eternal  character  of  Christ's  priesthood.  He  was  to 
come  not  only  after  the  order  of  Aaron  and  offer  a 
bloody  sacrifice,  but  like  Melchisedek  to  bring  forth  an 
offering  of  Bread  and  Wine.  In  the  upper  chamber 
Christ  fulfilled  this  type.  On  the  Cross  and  at  the 
Institution  we  recognize  Christ  as  our  High  Priest. 

He  was  also  to  be  a  King.  The  Jewish  heart  beat 
wild  with  delight  as  they  dwelt  on  this  element  of  the 
promised  Deliverer.  He  was  to  occupy  the  throne 
of  His  father  David,  and  of  His  kingdom  there  was  to 
be  no  end.  The  Kingdom  He  founded  was  indeed 
unlike  the  worldly  one  they  expected ;  nevertheless  it 
was  a  Kingdom.  It  was  so  heralded,  and  the  gospel 
He  preached  was  "  the  gospel  of  the  Kingdom." 
Asked  by  Pilate  if  He  was  a  King,  He  declared  He 
was,  Thou  sayest,  —  that  I  am,  —  a  King. 

He  was  to  be  certified  to  the  world  by  a  special 
herald.  A  special  messenger,  a  second  Elijah,  was  to 
precede  Him.  "  I  will  send  my  messenger  and  he 
shall  prepare  the  way  before  me."  "  I  will  send  you 


HEAVEN'S  AMBASSADOR  25 

Elijah  the  prophet  before  the  day  of  the  Lord." 
Speaking  of  John  Baptist,  Christ  said  this  is  Elias 
which  was  for  to  come.  Moreover,  the  place  was 
designated  where  he  was  to  be  born.  He  was  to 
be  born  in  Bethlehem  of  Judea.  To  this  the  priests 
and  scribes  bear  witness,  quoting  the  prophecy,  "  and 
thou,  Bethlehem,"  etc.  He  was  to  come,  so  Isaiah 
foretold,  preaching  good  tidings,  healing  the  broken- 
hearted, bringing  deliverance  to  captives,  recovering 
of  sight  to  the  blind.  This  He  claimed  to  have  done, 
and  to  it  every  account  of  His  life  bears  witness. 
His  manner  and  His  method  were  preannounced  and 
so  also  was  His  rejection.  The  incidents  of  the  final 
tragedy  are  by  different  prophets  most  minutely  fore- 
told. We  could  gather  its  history  from  the  prophets 
alone.  They  give  a  connected  story  from  His  entry 
into  Jerusalem,  "  Behold  thy  King  cometh  unto  thee," 
to  the  "  My  God,  my  God,  why  hast  thou  forsaken 
me?"  He  will  be  betrayed  by  a  friend  and  for  thirty 
pieces  of  silver,  and  abandoned  by  His  disciples. 
"  Smite  the  shepherd  and  the  sheep  shall  be  scat- 
tered." He  is  to  be  treated  as  a  criminal,  "  numbered 
with  the  transgressors,"  and  He  is  to  be  despised  and 
rejected  of  men.  False  witnesses  are  to  rise  up  against 
Him  and  He  is  to  be  oppressed  and  afflicted,  yet 
openeth  not  His  mouth.  He  will  be  grievously  in- 
sulted and  scourged.  He  will  hide  not  His  face  from 
shame  and  spitting,  and  He  will  give  His  back  to  the 
smiters.  He  shall  be  put  to  a  most  cruel  death  of 
crucifixion.  "They  pierced  my  hands  and  my  feet," 
and  "They  shall  look  on  Him  whom  they  have 
pierced."  The  scene  on  Calvary  is  minutely  de- 


26  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

scribed.  "  They  part  my  garments  among  them  and 
cast  lots  upon  my  vesture."  "  They  shall  stand 
jeering  upon  me."  "  They  gave  me  gall  to  eat,  and 
when  I  was  thirsty  they  gave  me  vinegar  to  drink." 
These  and  other  details  are  given  by  the  prophets. 
Daniel  declares  that  the  expected  "  Monarch  shall  be 
cast  off."  Isaiah  sees  Him  as  One  who  was  wounded 
for  our  transgressions.  "  He  was  bruised  for  our  in- 
iquities. He  was  oppressed  and  afflicted.  He  was 
cast  off  out  of  the  land  of  the  living,  and  He  made 
His  grave  with  the  wicked  and  with  the  rich  in  His 
death." 

Nor  by  these  alone,  but  by  a  series  of  connected 
types,  and  by  the  whole  Jewish  ceremonial  law,  its 
worship  and  sacrifices,  was  the  coming  Deliverer  and 
His  offices  and  work  proclaimed.  We  may  not  ac- 
cept the  application  of  all  these  many  and  sometimes 
mystical  references  to  Christ,  but  a  Mind  other  than 
the  writer's  evidently  moved  them,  age  after  age,  to 
depict  with  increasing  particularity  the  Person  of 
Christ,  His  advent,  character,  life,  and  death.  The 
critical  spirit  of  our  day  in  its  rigid  demand  for 
proof  rejects  the  spiritual  exegetical  methods  of  the 
fathers.  But  enough  and  more  than  enough  remains, 
in  a  broad  view  of  Jewish  history,  to  justify  the 
contention,  that  Israel  looked  forward  to  a  great 
Deliverer.  He  was  to  be  anointed  from  on  high, 
and  God's  purpose  to  bless  mankind  through  Israel 
was  to  find  its  fulfilment  through  Him.  Any  reason- 
able view  of  the  life  of  our  Lord  so  conforms  to  these 
multiform  predictions  as  to  show  that  Christ  was  He. 

And  not  alone  did  Hebrew  pjophets  proclaim  His 


HEAVEN'S  AMBASSADOR  27 

advent,  but  aided  by  that  divine  light  that  lighteth 
every  man  that  cometh  into  the  world,  heathen  poets 
and  philosophers  saw,  in  their  better  moments  of 
inspiration  and  through  their  tears  over  the  falling 
fortunes  of  mankind,  the  coming  of  One  who  should 
restore  its  lost  nobility  and  usher  in  a  brighter  day. 
So  through  the  haze  of  hopes  and  fears  Plato  and 
Virgil  and  others,  kindling  with  aspirations  for  hu- 
manity's betterment,  discerned  a  shadowy  outline  of 
a  Heaven-sent  Ideal  and  to  the  pagan  world  foretold 
of  Christ.  Ancient  prophecy  thus  becomes  focussed 
on  Him.  As  has  been  well  said,  "  Prophecy  takes  off 
its  crown  and  lays  it  at  the  feet  of  One  who  is  to  be." 
Thus  Christ  stands  out  on  the  luminous  background 
of  prophecy,  peerless  and  supreme,  among  the 
world's  religious  teachers.  He  alone  comes  authen- 
ticated by  the  cumulative  evidence  of  a  series  of 
converging  lines  of  prophecy.  It  is  then  a  fair  and 
reasonable  conclusion,  believing  that  there  is  a  God, 
that  Christ  is  a  Teacher  sent  by  Him.  Not  merely 
like  those  not  so  authenticated,  but  with  the  tran- 
scendant  authority  of  One,  specially  certificated  to  be 
the  Prophet  and  Light  of  the  world. 

Is  it  then  wise,  O  man,  not  to  think  of  the  future, 
and  to  grope  thy  way  alone?  Sphinx-like  thy  destiny 
confronts  thee  and  by  natural  powers  thou  canst  not 
solve  the  riddle.  Does  the  idea  of  the  unknowable 
rise  up  like  an  adamantine  barrier  and  baffle  thee? 
It  may  appal  but  need  not  lead  thee  to  sit  down 
in  contented  unbelief.  In  philosophy  and  religion 
truths  polarize.  There  are  truths  and  counter-truths. 
Wisdom  lays  hold  of  each.  Man  can  apprehend  what 


28  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

he  cannot  wholly  comprehend.  To  his  aid  God  has, 
we  have  seen,  sent  a  Teacher.  All  sensible  persons 
accept  gladly  the  assistance  of  those  wiser  than  them- 
selves. In  religious  matters,  the  intellectual  more 
than  others,  need  it.  It  is  spiritual  suicide  to  reject 
the  Great  Teacher's  help.  Shall  we  be  like  logs 
drifting  on  the  stream  of  life  ignorant  of  our  origin, 
careless  of  our  destiny?  When  a  light  is  seen  shining 
out  on  the  waters,  is  it  the  dictate  of  prudence  or 
common  sense  for  the  shipwrecked  to  ignore  it? 
Shall  we  be  like  the  fools  who  say,  "if  God  made 
me,  He  will  take  care  of  me,"  when  we  neglect  the 
means  which  His  care  and  Love  has  provided?  How 
long  shall  we  persist  in  saying  we  cannot  believe 
when  we  really  do  not  want  to,  and  do  not  try? 

Belief  lies  largely  in  the  power  of  our  predispositions 
and  our  will.  If  we  are  willing  to  believe,  God  will 
give  the  light.  It  is  as  clear  as  the  shining  of  the 
sun  that  Christ  is  the  most  truth-unfolding  teacher 
the  world  has  ever  known.  If  we  do  not  mean  to 
throw  our  souls  hopelessly  away,  if  we  have  gotten 
any  control  over  our  brutish  passions,  if  there  is  any 
spark  of  unworldly  and  divine  aspiration  in  us,  if  we 
have  any  conception  of  our  eternal  and  royal  destiny, 
we  shall  willingly  accept  from  the  Great  Teacher  the 
help  He  proffers.  We  shall  let  His  words  be  a  light 
to  our  path,  and  His  Spirit  direct  our  conduct.  Un- 
like all  other  Teachers  He  extends  His  aid  most 
generously.  Why  refuse  it?  Why  stand  apart  in  the 
vanity  of  our  self-conceit,  criticising  and  accepting 
and  rejecting  this  or  that  portion  of  His  teaching? 
Why  not  be  a  real  and  loyal  disciple,  humbly  sitting 


HEAVEN'S   AMBASSADOR  29 

at  His  Feet  as  learners?  If  He  is  a  Teacher  sent 
from  our  Heavenly  Father,  why  not  trust  Him  as  a 
child  trusts  the  wider  wisdom  of  his  parents?  If  we 
do  this  He  will  be  then  our  Companion,  a  Friend,  a 
more  than  Lover.  He  will  be  to  thee  a  shield  and 
castle  and  a  sure  defence.  He  will  be  thy  comfort  in 
life,  thy  support  in  death,  thy  reward  in  Eternity. 


CHAPTER   III 
THE   DIVINE   TEACHER 

THAT  Christ  was  a  teacher  divinely  sent  is  thus 
stated  in  the  Acts :  "  God  anointed  Jesus  of 
Nazareth  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with  power,  Who 
went  about  doing  good,  and  healing  all  that  were 
oppressed  of  the  devil;  for  God  was  with  Him." 
And  in  the  midst  of  the  present  tumult  and  strife  of 
tongues,  the  cry  is  not  unfrequently  heard,  "  Let  us 
get  back  to  Christ.  What  we  men  of  the  twentieth 
century  want  is,  not  the  Christ  overladen  with  dogmas, 
not  the  Christ  of  the  churches;  we  want  the  real 
Christ,  Christ  with  His  own  rich  purposes  for  mankind, 
with  His  own  inner  life,  the  Christ  who  having  known 
our  nature  in  all  the  range  of  trial  and  temptation  can 
sympathize  with  it.  Give  back  to  us,  O  theologians, 
the  Christ  you  have  seemingly  taken  away;  the 
Christ  indomitable  in  His  courage  before  the  Ro- 
man governor  and  Jewish  high  priest,  Who  could 
for  others'  sake  suffer  poverty  and  wretchedness  and 
die  on  the  cross,  yet  Who  loved  the  flowers  and  birds 
and  little  children." 

The  writer  is  very  far  from  being  able  to  set  forth 
that  life.  He  has  a  feeling  that  it  is  a  subject  the 
contemplation  of  an  eternity  cannot  exhaust.  He  is 
neither  worthy  nor  able  to  enter  into  so  holy  a  sanc- 
tuary. He  would  put  his  shoes  from  off  his  feet,  and 


THE  DIVINE  TEACHER  31 

bow  his  head  to  the  dust,  before  the  glory  of  this 
burning  mystery.  But  as  God  ofttimes  uses  the  weak 
things  of  earth,  so  it  may  please  Him  to  let  these 
words  be  of  service. 

What  has  been  commonly  observed  respecting 
Christ  is  His  freedom  from  the  prejudices  of  His  race 
and  time.  On  all  of  the  world's  great  heroes  we  see 
more  or  less  distinctly  traced  their  national  predilec- 
tions and  those  of  their  age.  No  child  of  man  is  inde- 
pendent of  or  superior  to  his  environment.  The  age 
out  of  which  a  man  is  born  is  the  mother  of  his  mind, 
and  she  impresses  her  features  more  or  less  distinctly 
on  the  features  of  her  child.  The  greatest  of  the 
world's  conquerors  are  themselves  conquered.  The 
Caesar  is  ever  the  great  Roman  conqueror ;  the  reform- 
ing Mahomet  remains  the  uncultured  Arab.  With 
philosophers  or  poets,  statesmen  or  seers,  it  is  the 
same.  But  of  Christ  it  has  been  said,  "  No  Jewish 
sect  could  claim  Him  as  its  adherent;  no  Jewish 
teacher  has  left  on  Him  a  narrowing  impress.  No 
popular  errors  among  the  people  received  any  sanc- 
tion at  His  hands.  He  will  not  hear  of  their  su- 
perstition about  Sabbath  observance.  He  will  not 
sanction  their  intolerance  of  the  Samaritans."  Here 
is  one,  born  amongst  the  most  prejudiced  and  bigoted 
of  people,  with  prejudices  so  bitter  and  deep  that 
nineteen  centuries  of  oppression  have  not  effaced 
them,  Who  rose  superior  to  them  all,  Who  came  and 
announced  a  religion,  which  set  at  naught  all  the 
intense  convictions  of  the  Jewish  heart,  Who  taught 
a  doctrine  that  swept  away  all  the  barriers  between 
Jew  and  Gentile,  Who  declared  the  Fatherhood  of 


32  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

God  over  all  the  race  and  the  universality  of  His 
religion.  He,  in  a  word,  proclaimed  a  religion  such 
as  had  never  entered  into  the  mind  of  Hebrew  prophet 
or  Greek  philosopher  to  conceive  or  dream. 

You  are  ready,  in  the  presence  of  this  great  marvel, 
to  say  that  Christ  was  the  greatest  of  all  religious 
teachers,  that  He  was  the  greatest  of  men.  But  do 
we  not  fall  into  a  logical  fallacy  in  saying  this?  For 
the  question  is  whether  He  was  merely  a  man  or  no. 
If  He  was  merely  man,  why  had  He  not  some  of  those 
prejudices  of  age  or  race,  that  no  other  known  man 
has  been  without?  The  most  logical  inference  is 
that  this  Teacher  is  in  some  way  different  from  the 
children  of  men.  We  cannot  put  ourselves  into  His 
category.  He  stands  apart  from  our  own.  He  is 
unique. 

Gazing  also  at  the  beauty  and  harmony  of  His 
character  we  see  why  by  almost  universal  acclaim  He 
is  recognized  as  the  Ideal  Man.  "  It  is  impossible," 
said  Liddon,  "  to  maintain  with  any  show  of  reason 
that  some  one  particular  temperament  shapes  His 
acts  and  words,  —  that  He  is  cynical,  or  choleric,  or 
melancholy,  or  phlegmatic."  He  is  not  a  sanguine 
person,  who,  carried  away  with  His  own  enthusiasm, 
sees  only  a  bright  future  to  His  enterprise.  He  calmly 
foretells  His  own  crucifixion,  the  martyrdom  of  His 
Apostles,  and  after  it  has  gone  throughout  the  world, 
the  final  failure  of  His  religion.  "When  the  Son  of 
Man  cometh  will  He  find  faith  on  the  earth  ?  "  Yet  He 
is  not  a  melancholy  recluse.  He  sits  at  meat  at  the 
publican's  table,  is  a  guest  at  the  marriage  feast,  cheers 
and  gladdens  His  disciples'  hearts  with  the  gift  of  a 


THE   DIVINE  TEACHER  33 

triumphant  hope.  He  comes  not  like  a  common 
Reformer,  with  choleric  temper,  breaking  down  with 
indiscriminate  zeal  the  institutions  of  the  past.  "  I 
come  not  to  destroy  the  law,  but  to  fulfil."  1  He  is 
not  of  a  lymphatic  temperament,  combining  spasmod- 
ically energetic  action  with  exhausted  periods  of 
sluggishness.  As  the  sun  in  the  heavens,  so  steadily 
did  He  pursue  His  life's  task.  "  My  Father  worketh 
hitherto,  and  I  work." 

With  this  freedom  He  combines  in  a  wonderful 
manner  the  two  types  of  masculine  and  feminine  ex- 
cellence. We  see  in  Him  the  fortitude,  resoluteness, 
independence,  leadership,  government  of  others,  that 
marks  the  manly  side  of  character ;  together  with  the 
marked  unselfishness,  thoughtfulness  of  others,  tender- 
ness, gentleness,  which  are  woman's  characteristics. 
What  heroic  courage  is  seen  in  His  very  walk  as,  on 
His  last  journey  with  all  that  was  before,  we  read 
"  that  they  were  on  the  way  going  up  to  Jerusalem ; 
and  Jesus  went  before  them  :  and  they  were  amazed ; 
and  as  they  followed  they  were  afraid." 2  What 
moral  courage  is  displayed  by  His  dealings  with  the 
high  priests  and  Pilate,  what  marvellous  endurance 
is  seen  in  His  silence  during  the  terrible  scourging,3 
what  surpassing  control  in  His  prolonged  agony  on 
the  cross.  Yet  with  woman's  care  He  heals  the  sick, 
provides  for  the  wants  of  the  multitude ;  forgetful  of 
self,  heals  the  ear  of  His  enemy,4  as  He  is  being  led 
away.  He  is  at  once  the  Lion  of  the  Tribe  of  Judah 
and  the  Lamb  of  God. 

1  S.  Matt.  v.  17.  •  S.  Matt,  xxvii.  26. 

8  S.  Mark  x.  32.  *  S.  Luke  xxii.  51. 


34  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

Moreover,  we  observe  in  Him  a  most  happy  agree- 
ment and  harmony  of  the  active  and  the  contem- 
plative life.  In  the  religious  world  we  see  the 
greatest  diversity  between  the  two  kinds  of  saints. 
One  is  more  meditative,  receptive,  retiring ;  the  other 
more  speculative,  active,  enterprising.  The  mystic 
loves  the  solitude  of  the  hermit  or  the  cell  of  the 
recluse.  The  active  spirit  loves  the  crowded  mart 
and  the  habitations  of  men.  The  one  gives  to  the 
Church  the  Elijahs  and  S.  John,  a  S-  Theresa  and 
S.  John  of  the  Cross ;  the  other  a  S.  Paul,  a  Howard, 
a  Vincent  de  Paul.  Bound  together  in  practical 
union  were  these  two  principles  in  the  life  of  Christ. 
Who  more  active,  immersed  in  labors,  incessant  in 
His  toil?  In  city,  in  country,  in  temple  and  syna- 
gogue, by  the  lake,  in  the  wilderness,  by  the  well- 
side  and  in  the  house,  ever  was  He  mingling  with 
men.  It  was  a  life  of  incessant  labor  and  uncertain 
repose.  Yet  in  the  midst  of  it  all  He  gave  nights  to 
prayer,1  and  abode  ever  in  conscious  communion 
with  God.  The  exasperating  calumnies  of  His 
opponents,  the  yells  of  the  maddened  multitude  do 
not  disturb  His  inward  peace. 

Moreover,  in  our  estimate  of  character  we  bring 
each  man's  life  to  the  test  of  duty.  We  ask  how  he 
performed  his  work.  Knowing  also  that  particular 
virtues  are  not  tests  of  character,  we  ask  what  was 
the  general  underlying  motive  of  his  conduct?  And 
here  Christ's  life  shines  out  with  an  unparalleled 
splendor.  Where  is  the  man,  however  great,  in 
ancient  or  modern  times  in  whom  some  flaw  is  not 

1  S.  Luke  vi.  12. 


THE   DIVINE  TEACHER  35 

to  be  found  ?  Socrates  is  superstitious,  Cicero  vain, 
Seneca  avaricious,  Goethe  selfish.  Most  men  have 
their  weak  side,  and  in  their  strenuous  pursuit  of 
some,  neglect  other  duties.  But  Christ  is  consistent 
all  the  way  up  and  all  the  way  •  through.  •  He  is 
obedient  to  His  mother  and  foster-father.  He  keeps 
the  Church's  law.  From  childhood  up  He  is  about 
His  Father's  business.1  He  is  led  by  the  Spirit.2 
And  the  one  governing  motive  that  animates  Him 
is  the  desire  for  the  Father's  glory  and  the  salvation 
of  men.  It  makes  Him  even  thirst  for  the  Cross  as 
the  means  of  its  accomplishment.  "  I  have  a  baptism 
to  be  baptized  with;  and  how  am  I  straitened  till 
it  be  accomplished."  3  It  inspires  His  High  Priestly 
intercession,  "  Father,  forgive  them  for  they  know  not 
what  they  do."  4 

It  has  been  well  said  of  Him  that  "  He  is  tender 
without  false  sentiment,  benevolent  without  a  trace  of 
weakness,  resolute  without  passion,  decided  without 
obstinacy.  His  condescension  never  degenerates  into 
mere  familiarity.  His  incomparable  dignity  never 
touches  the  confines  of  pride.  His  lofty  freedom 
from  the  world's  tyranny  never  becomes  contempt 
for  man.  His  repugnance  to  man's  obduracy  never 
takes  on  any  form  of  misanthropy.  His  implacable 
hostility  to  sin  is  always  allied  to  the  warmest  love 
for  sinners." 

Evil  in  all  its  forms  He  condemns.  Teaching  after 
the  Eastern  fashion  by  an  acted  parable  He  con- 
demns the  barren  fig-tree  as  a  symbol  of  Israel's 

1  S.  Luke  ii.  49.  *  S.  Luke  xii.  50. 

*  S.  Luke  iv.  i.  *  S.  Luke  xxiii.  34. 


36  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

unfruitfulness.1  At  the  beginning  and  end  of  His 
ministry  He  purifies  the  Temple.  At  the  first  cleans- 
ing, when  the  cattle  are  there,  He  takes  to  drive  them 
out  a  whip  of  small  cords.2  At  the  last  cleansing, 
when  there  are  only  present  the  money  changers 
and  sellers  of  goods,  He  does  not  need  one.3  The 
buyers  and  sellers  in  the  temple  do  not  resist  Him 
as  they  would  if  it  were  an  act  of  human  passion,  but 
recognize  the  dignity  of  His  prophetical  character 
and  the  justice  of  His  action.4  Acting  by  that  divine 
supremacy  that  subordinates  individual  rights  to 
nature's  laws,  He  destroys  the  herd  of  swine  which 
were  illegally  being  kept.5  He  is  obliged  to  speak 
the  word  of  condemnation  upon  Jerusalem,6  though 
He  does  it  with  tears.  He  must,  as  judge,  pro- 
nounce the  catalogue  of  woes  upon  the  scribes  and 
Pharisees,7  while  He  bestows  the  blessings  of  the 
Beatitudes  on  His  disciples.8  He  is  full  of  mercy 
and  tenderness  to  all  who  will  accept  Him.  The 
publicans  and  harlots  found  access  to  Him  on  repen- 
tance. He  is  equally  Righteous  and  strictly  Just. 
He  will  "  reward  every  man  according  to  his  works,"9 
and  finally  divide  the  sheep  from  the  goats.10 

Again,  every  man  has  his  own  inner  life  which 
self-interest  bids  him  shield  from  the  world's  gaze. 
But  we  are  enabled  to  gaze  into  the  inner  temple  of 
the  life  of  Christ.  And  what  do  we  find?  Like  afl 
great  saints  He  had  His  special  maxims  on  whose 

1  S.  Matt.  xxi.  19.  6  S.  Luke  xiii.  34. 

*  S.  John  ii.  15.  7  S.  Matt,  xxiii.  14. 

8  S.  Mark  xi.  15.  »  S.  Matt.  v.  3-13. 

4  S.  Mark  xi.  17.  9  S.  Matt.  xvi.  27. 

6  S.  Mark  v.  13.  10  S.  Matt.  xxv.  33. 


THE   DIVINE  TEACHER  37 

lines  His  life  was  fashioned.  The  word  of  prophecy 
was  His  ruling  thought,  "  Lo,  I  come  to  do  Thy  will, 
O  God."1  It  was  not  His  last  but  His  constant 
prayer,  "  Not  My  will  but  Thine  be  done."  It  is  the 
first  and  emphatic  utterance  of  His  boyhood :  "  Wist 
ye  not  that  I  must  be  about  My  Father's  business."  2 
And  that  Father's  business  He  read  delineated  in 
every  Messianic  Psalm,  in  the  details  of  every  sacri- 
fice offered  in  the  Temple.  He  knew  thereby  that 
He  was  to  be,  as  John  the  Baptist  proclaimed,  "  The 
Lamb  of  God."  From  the  first  He  had  Calvary 
before  Him :  "  I  have  a  baptism  to  be  baptized  with  ; 
and  how  am  I  straitened  till  it  be  accomplished."  3  It 
was  not  an  apprehension  of  how  His  life  might  pos- 
sibly terminate.  It  was  to  be  the  great  instrumentality 
for  the  world's  deliverance.  "  The  Son  of  man  came 
to  minister  and  to  give  His  life  a  ransom  for  many."  4 
He  came  not  as  other  reformers  have  come,  work- 
ing out  some  self-designed  plan,  modifying  it  accord- 
ing to  circumstances  or  learning  by  failures.  From 
the  first  He  announced  the  character  of  His  Gospel. 
It  was  "  the  gospel  of  the  Kingdom."  The  .long-ex- 
pected King  and  Kingdom  had  come.  "  The  Kingdom 
of  God  is  not  within  you  (as  the  text  is  mistranslated), 
but  among  you."  It  was  to  be  a  visible  organization, 
like  a  city5  or  a  temple.  It  would  also  be  a  spiritual 
power,  like  leaven  hidden  in  the  meal,  leavening  hu- 
manity, like  a  grain  of  mustard  seed  growing  to  a 
great  tree.6 

1  Ps.  xl.  7.  4  S.  Matt.  xx.  28. 

2  S.  Luke  ii.  49.  6  S.  Matt.  v.  14. 

8  S.  Luke  xii.  50.  6  S.  Luke  xiii.  19. 


38  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

The  cross  also  stood  out  from  the  very  first  clearly 
before  Him.1  Long  before  the  crucifixion  occurred 
He  foretold  to  the  disciples  the  details  of  His  cruci- 
fixion.2 He  knew  the  fruitfulness  of  self-sacrifice. 
"Whoso  shall  seek  to  save  his  life  shall  lose  it;  and 
whosoever  shall  lose  his  life  shall  preserve  it."  3  He 
saw  beyond  the  horizon  of  His  own  day.  He  prophe- 
sied His  death  and  resurrection,4  the  gift  of  the  Com- 
forter, the  fall  of  Jerusalem,5  the  martyrdom  of  the 
Apostles,6  the  extension  of  His  Kingdom  throughout 
the  world,7  its  continuance  till  the  end  of  time,  His 
return  to  judge  the  world.8 

He  spoke  with  authority  and  as  never  man  spake. 
He  argued  not  as  the  doctors  and  scribes,9  but  it 
was  "  I  say  unto  you."  10  He  condemned  not,  as  the 
ancient  prophets  had  done,  the  vices  of  the  people, 
but  laid  bare  the  inner  motives  of  conduct.  There  is, 
it  is  said,  a  point  in  a  block  of  stone  which  being 
struck  the  mass  parts  asunder.  He  revealed  in  His 
condemnation  of  the  Pharisees  how  vices  may  be  the 
parent  of  seeming  virtues.  He  revealed  the  law  of 
goodness;  doing  right  because  it  is  right.  The 
rationalizing  Sadducees  and  the  Pharisaic  formalists 
were  indeed  scathingly  censured.  Yet  His  words 
were  balm  to  all  penitent  hearts.  As  no  other 
teacher  has  dared  to  address  humanity,  He  said, 
"  Come  unto  Me,  all  ye  that  travail  and  are  heavy 

1  S.  John  iii.  14.  6  S.  Luke  xxi.  16. 

2  S.  Matt.  xvi.  21.  7  S.  Mark  xiii.  10. 

8  S.  Luke  xvii.  33.  8  S.  Matt,  xxviii.  20. 

4  S.  Mark  ix.  9.  9  S.  Matt.  vii.  29. 

6  S.  Luke  xix.  43-44;  S.  Matt.  xxiv.  2.      10  S.  Matt.  v.  18. 


THE  DIVINE   TEACHER  39 

laden  and  I  will  refresh  you." l  His  words  have 
gone  like  morning  over  the  earth.  "  Whosoever 
cometh  unto  Me  I  will  in  no  wise  cast  out."  No 
wonder  the  poor,  the  sick,  the  publicans,  the  sinners 
flocked  about  Him,  for  the  touch  of  His  garment 
brought  health  and  His  word  life  to  their  souls. 

And  how  gradually  He  led  His  Apostles  on  to  the 
recognition  of  Himself.  He  taught  not  as  others 
have  done,  laying  down  postulate  and  premise,-  argu- 
ment and  conclusion.  He  drew  men  to  Him  saying, 
"  Come  and  see."  And  as  they  dwelt  with  Him,  little 
by  little  they  came  to  discern  Him  as  the  prophet 
for  whose  advent  the  nation  waited ;  as  the  Messiah, 
as  something  yet  more  wonderful,  till  finally  Peter 
made  the  confession  for  them  all :  "  Thou  art  the 
Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God." 2 

But  the  culminating  characteristic  of  Christ  is  His 
sinlessness.  Sin  is  common  to  all  the  children  of 
men.  None  is  so  obtuse  as  to  be  unconscious  of  it. 
According  to  the  old  heathen  saying,  we  know  the 
better  but  pursue  the  worse.  Mea  Culpa  is  our  con- 
stant plea.  The  burning  invective  of  S.  Paul  finds 
a  universal  response.  We  are  all  guilty  before  God. 
Not  those  only  who  have  lived  in  defiant  rebellion, 
but  those  whose  moral  aim  has  been  highest.  The 
complaint  of  humanity  finds  its  expression  in  the 
Apostle's  words,  "  O  wretched  man  that  I  am,  who 
shall  deliver  me  from  the  body  of  this  death."  But 
amidst  the  universal  corruption  there  arises  one  spot- 
less exception.  To  His  sinlessness  His  enemies  were 
witness.  Pilate  could  find  no  fault  in  Him.  "  I  am 

i  S.  Matt.  xi.  28.  2  S.  Matt.  xvi.  16. 


40  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

innocent  of  the  blood  of  this  just  person."  l  Judas' 
remorse  came  from  his  knowing  he  had  shed  inno- 
cent blood.2  Peter  had  felt  its  power  when  Christ 
wrought  the  miracle  of  the  fishes.3  The  Apostles 
have  left  on  record  their  testimony.  "  He  was  the 
Holy  One  and  the  Just."  4  "  He  was  the  Lamb  with- 
out blemish."  5  "  He  was  Jesus  Christ  the  Right- 
eous." "  He  was  holy,  harmless,  undefiled,  separate 
from  sinners."6  "He  knew  no  sin."7  "He  was 
without  sin."8  "He  did  no  sin,  neither  was  guile 
found  in  His  mouth."9 

It  has  been  remarked  that  it  is  harder  to  gain  such 
witness  from  friends  than  enemies.  "  Every  con- 
siderable man  is  having  materials  of  his  life  written 
as  with  a  pen  of  iron  that  never  blunts,  with  an  ink 
that  never  fades,  with  a  curiosity  that  never  falters. 
He  is  watched  by  unsuspected  eyes  and  reported  by 
unexpected  hands.  Christ's  disciples  had  been  with 
Him  in  all  circumstances  of  familiarity.  They  had 
tenanted  the  same  narrow  chamber ;  they  had  rocked 
in  the  same  little  boat.  One  hasty  word,  one  ques- 
tionable look,  one  act  of  selfishness  would  have 
caused  the  light  to  fade  from  His  Face  and  the  dia- 
dem to  pale  upon  His  Brow."  Yet  it  is  from  those 
so  intimate  with  Him,  that  there  goes  up  the  uni- 
versal testimony  as  to  His  absolute  sinlessness. 
Moreover,  we  have  Christ's  own  testimony.  The 
greater  the  saint,  the  more  he  realizes  his  own  defi- 

S.  Luke  xxiii.  14;  S.  Matt,  xxvii.  24. 

S.  Matt,  xxvii.  4.  6  Ileb.  vii.  26. 

S.  Luke  v.  8.  7  2  Cor.  v.  21. 

Acts  iii.  14.  8  Heb.  iv.  15. 

i  Peter  i.  19.  '  I  Pet.  ii.  22. 


THE   DIVINE   TEACHER  41 

ciencies  before  God,  his  imperfections  in  contrast 
with  God's  sanctity,  his  need  of  pardon  and  of  help. 
But  the  prayers  which  Christ  addresses  to  the  Father 
contain  no  acknowledgment  of  any  fault  or  defect, 
but  assertions  such  as  no  created  being  could  make 
of  His  absolute  obedience  to  God's  will.  They  are 
divine  colloquies,  of  an  equal  to  an  equal.1 

We  have  in  this  imperfect  survey  omitted  all  refer- 
ence to  the  miracles  or  signs  wrought  by  Christ. 
We  have  simply  examined  some  of  the  leading  ele- 
ments of  His  character.  It  can  but  be  noticed  that 
we  have  also  omitted  reference  to  S.  John's  Gospel. 
The  synoptics  give  us  all  that  our  present  purpose 
needs.  They  reveal  Christ's  unique  and  matchless 
character.  It  shows  Him  to  be  separate  from  us. 

We  may  then  consider  what  He  claimed  concerning 
Himself.  What  was  His  own  testimony  concerning 
Himself? 

Though  the  temple  was  God's  covenanted  meet- 
ing-place with  man,  and  there  He  placed  His  Name, 
yet  Christ  could  say  "  that  in  this  place  is  One 
greater  than  the  temple."2  He  was  greater  than 
the  most  sacred  manifestation  of  God  because  God 
was  in  a  fuller  sense  manifested  in  Him.  Again  God, 
in  the  awful  glories  of  Sinai,  had  revealed  His  sover- 
eign will  and  bade  men  keep  the  Sabbath  day  holy 
with  strict  observance.  But  as  of  equal  authority 
with  the  Divine  Lawgiver,  Christ  proclaims  Himself 
to  be  "Lord  also  of  the  Sabbath."3  John  Baptist, 
greatest  of  prophets,  feels  the  mysterious  element  in 
Christ  that  separates  them.  "  I  indeed  baptize  you 

1  S.  Matt.  xi.  25,  27.  a  S.  Matt.  xii.  6.  *  S.  Mark  ii.  28. 


42  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

with  water  unto  repentance :  but  He  that  cometh 
after  me  is  mightier  than  I,  whose  shoes  I  am  not 
worthy  to  bear:  He  shall  baptize  you  with  the  Holy 
Ghost  and  fire."  l  As  showing  that  He  is  acting  in 
His  own  right  and  not  as  an  agent,  Christ  baptizes 
His  Church  at  Pentecost  with  the  unique  sign  of 
fire.  Who  is  it  that  can  thus  send  the  Holy  Ghost 
save  one  who  is  equal  to  Him?  Again,  the  angels 
who  are  God's  servants,  are  sent  by  Him.  He  calls 
them  His  angels  "whom  He  will  send."2  He  has 
an  equal  jurisdiction  over  them  as  the  Almighty. 
However,  when  the  high  priest  solemnly  adjured 
Him  "  to  tell  us  whether  thou  be  the  Christ,  the  Son 
of  God,"  Jesus  replied,  "Thou  hast  said."3  He,  the 
Son  of  Man,  had  also  a  higher  sonship.  He  was 
the  Son  of  God.  Speaking  of  the  relation  that  existed 
between  the  Father  and  Himself,  He  declared  that 
"  no  man  knoweth  who  the  Son  is  but  the  Father  and 
who  the  Father  is  but  the  Son,  and  he  to  whom  the 
Son  will  reveal  Him."4  As  no  one  can  compre- 
hend God  but  God,  He  here  declares  Himself  to  be 
God.  He  asserts  also  that  He  shall  come  in  the 
glory  of  His  Father  with  His  angels,  and  then  He 
shall  reward  every  man  according  to  his  works. 5 
He  could  no  more  clearly  declare  His  divinity  than 
by  claiming  thus  to  be  the  judge  of  all  men.  For 
who  can  judge  the  acts  and  thoughts  of  all  men  and 
rightly  sit  on  that  Throne  but  God  Himself?  No 
wonder  Peter  for  himself  and  the  Apostles  acknowl- 

1  S.  Matt.  iii.  u.  *  S.  Luke  x.  22. 

2  S.  Matt.  xxiv.  31.  *  S.  Matt.  xvi.  27. 
'  S.  Matt.  xxvi.  64. 


THE   DIVINE   TEACHER  43 

edged  Him  to  be  the  "  Son  of  the  Living  God."  The 
evil  spirits  also  with  their  spiritual  discernment  so 
recognized  Him.  The  unclean  spirits  when  they  saw 
Him  fell  down  before  Him  and  cried,  saying,  "  Thou 
art  the  Son  of  God."  "Jesus,  Son  of  the  most  high 
God." l  He  accepts  the  homage  due  to  Himself. 
The  holy  women  when  He  meets  them  prostrate 
themselves.  "They  came  and  held  Him  by  the  .feet 
and  worshipped  Him."2  S.  Thomas  as  he  does  so 
exclaims,  "  My  Lord  and  My  God." 

There  are  two  ways  of  looking  at  a  man's  life.  One 
that  gives  the  historical  setting  of  it,  the  other  its 
meaning,  its  purpose  and  influence.  The  first  records 
His  acts,  the  second  His  character.  To  some  extent 
we  see  this  division  in  the  Gospels.  The  Synoptists 
set  forth  the  first,  S.  John  the  latter.  These  two 
traditions  grew  up  contemporaneously  together  and 
each  has  its  value.  If,  having  seen  what  the  histori- 
cal account  says  of  Christ,  we  turn  to  S.  John,  we 
find  that  his  testimony  is  in  accord  with  it. 

There  we  find  that  Christ  declared  that  He  came 
down  from  Heaven  and  was  in  existence  before  Abra- 
ham was  born.  He  asserted  that  He  came  from 
being  with  the  Father,  and  came  forth  out  of  God. 
He  is  united  to  the  Father  by  no  mere  sympathetic 
or  moral  agreement,  but  by  a  unity  of  nature  He 
and  the  Father  are  one.  They  work  in  a  co-ordinate 
equality  of  ceaseless  activity.  "  The  Father  worketh 
hitherto  and  I  work."  He  calls  on  the  Father  to 
glorify  Him,  not  with  some  created  glory,  but  with 
that  glory  deity  alone  could  sustain.  "  Father,  glorify 
1  S.  Mark  iii.  n.  2  S.  Matt,  xxviii.  9. 


44  CHRISTIAN   AND'   CATHOLIC 

Thou  me  with  Thine  Own  Self."  Nor  was  it  to  be 
something  newly  added  to  His  nature,  but  to  be  "  the 
glory  which  I  had  with  Thee  before  the  world  was." 
Men  are  to  give  Him  divine  honor  and  worship, 
and  to  honor  the  Son  even  as  they  honor  the 
Father.  Thus  the  accounts  in  the  Gospels,  in  relation 
to  the  divine  character  of  His  person,  harmonize. 

As  we  contemplate  this  unique  character  we  feel 
no  wonder  that  Renan,  unbeliever  that  he  was,  felt 
obliged  to  declare  that  Jesus  will  never  be  surpassed. 

He  was,  as  the  Unitarians  Channing  and  Walker 
enthusiastically  championed  Him,  divine.  If  the  life 
and  death  of  Socrates,  exclaimed  Rousseau,  with 
passionate  emotion,  are  those  of  a  philosopher,  the 
life  and  death  of  Jesus  Christ  are  those  of  a  god. 

If,  then,  towards  a  teacher  whose  fulfilment  of 
prophecy  shows  He  was  sent  by  God  we  can  but 
entertain  a  spirit  of  profound  reverence,  what  ought 
to  be  our  feelings  towards  One  of  so  transcendent  and 
majestic  a  character?  Surely  it  is  wise  to  take  Him 
for  our  religious  Teacher  and  to  trust  ourselves  to 
Him  as  our  Guide.  Practical  wisdom  and  common 
sense  can  ask  no  less. 

Doing  so,  then  from  these  considerations  of  His 
character  and  His  prophetical  office  one  inference 
may  be  safely  drawn. 

First,  concerning  His  character.  When  we  con- 
sider the  supreme  sanctity,  sincerity,  humility  of 
Christ's  character,  we  can  but  accept  in  their  full 
import  the  assertions  He  was  obliged  to  make  con- 
cerning Himself,  that  He  was  one  with  the  Father. 
He  was  the  Son  of  God.  If  they  were  not  made  by 


THE   DIVINE  TEACHER  45 

the  necessity  of  their  truthfulness  Christ  sinks  below 
the  standard  of  ordinary  morality.  He  is  no  longer 
humble,  unambitious,  sincere.  From  such  an  alter- 
native, every  fair  and  sober  mind  must  shrink.  "Dis- 
puting Thy  divinity,  O  Blessed  Lord,  we  could  no 
longer  clearly  recognize  Thy  human  perfections. 
Gazing  on  Thy  human  beauty  and  listening  to  Thy 
words,  we  cannot  deny  that  Thou  art  the  only  Son 
of  God  Most  High."  l 

Second,  concerning  His  office  as  a  Teacher,  there 
are  two  undisputed  facts  we  may  well  remember. 
God  punished  the  Hebrew  nation  severely  for  the  sin 
of  idolatry.  At  last  they  were  delivered  from  it,  and 
through  Israel  the  world  was  taught  that  "  the  Lord 
thy  God  is  One  God."  Men  may  come  to  disbelieve 
in  a  God,  but  the  world  will  never  go  back  to  Poly- 
theism. There  is  but  one  God,  and  the  worship  of 
any  other  is  the  sin  of  idolatry.  This  was  the  lesson 
that  God  took  two  thousand  years  to  enforce  on  the 
human  mind.  The  other  fact  is  this :  that  ninety- 
nine  hundredths  of  Christ's  followers  have  worshipped 
Him  as  God,  and  there  is  no  ground  to  suppose  they 
will  ever  do  otherwise.  As  we  cannot  suppose  God 
would  send  a  teacher  into  the  world  to  undo  His  own 
work  and  lead  the  world  back  into  the  sin  of  idolatry, 
we  must  either  give  up  Christ  as  a  Teacher  in  any 
way  sent  from  God,  or  else  admit  that  divine  worship 
is  rightly  paid  Him  because  He  is  God. 

In  deed  and  in  truth  Thou  art  the  King  of  Glory, 

O  Christ ;  Thou  art  the  everlasting  Son  of  the  Father. 

1  Liddon's  Bampton  Lectures. 


CHAPTER    IV 

THE   GREAT   CREDENTIAL 

THE  Divinity  of  Christ  may  be  proved  by  argu- 
ment, but  He  can  only  be  known  by  submis- 
sion and  prayer.  When  the  soul  accepts  Him  for  its 
Master  and  Guide,  it  is  willing  to  believe  what  He 
says  because  He  says  it,  and  to  do  what  He  wills 
because  He  wills  it. 

Now  Our  Lord  gave  one  great  credential  of  Him- 
self. Men  asked  Him  to  give  them  a  sign  for  the 
authority  He  claimed  to  possess.  "  Destroy  this 
temple,"  and  He  spake  of  the  temple  of  His  Body, 
"  and  in  three  days  I  will  raise  it  up."  l  Likewise  on 
several  occasions  He  foretold  His  resurrection  to  His 
disciples.  "  The  Son  of  Man  shall  be  betrayed  into 
the  hands  of  men.  And  they  shall  kill  Him,  and  the 
third  day  He  shall  be  raised  again."  2  It  is  clear  that 
He  speaks  not  in  a  metaphorical  sense  of  His  resur- 
rection. For  just  as  He  foretold  that  His  crucifixion 
was  to  be  a  literal  one,  so,  His  words  imply,  was  to  be 
His  resurrection.  If  one  was  literal  so  was  the  other. 
He  reiterated  this  promise  again  and  again.  He 
pledged  Himself  to  it.  Believing  in  Christ  we  rest 
securely  on  His  Word.  We  know  He  rose  from  the 
dead,  because  He  said  He  would.  This  is  enough  for 

i  S.  John  ii.  19. 

8  S.  Matt.  xvii.  23,  xvi.  23;  S.  Mark,  ix.  31,  x.  34. 


THE   GREAT   CREDENTIAL  47 

a  Christian.  There  is  no  higher  authority  ^or  more 
secure  proof. 

We  may  ask,  however,  what  corroborative  evidence 
is  there  that  He  did  so  rise? 

We  will  not  pause  to  argue  with  those  who  believe 
that  no  evidence  can  be  sufficient,  because  the  resur- 
rection involves  the  violation  of  the  natural  order. 
Any  idea  of  law  which  makes  a  miracle  impossible  is 
inconsistent  with  an  intelligent  belief  in  the  existence 
of  God.  A  miracle  is  only  an  unusual  manifestation 
of  power,  but  it  does  not  necessarily  involve  an  infrac- 
tion of  law.  If  man  can  work  marvels,  which  are 
miracles  to  the  unlearned,  by  combinations  of  nature's 
laws,  more  so  can  the  Almighty,  who  knows  them  in- 
timately and  thoroughly  as  His  own  thoughts.  God 
does  not  contradict  Himself  when  He  works  a  miracle, 
but  uses  modes  unknown  to  us.  The  so-called  laws 
of  nature  are  but  as  a  keyboard  upon  which  the 
Almighty  Hand  doth  play. 

The  first  corroborative  proof  that  Christ  kept  His 
word  is  to  be  found  in  a  fact  of  which  we  all  are  cog- 
nizant. For  the  Master  did  not  leave  the  evidence 
of  Himself,  as  many  seem  to  think,  to  the  risk  of 
manuscripts,  liable  as  they  are  to  destruction  and  in- 
terpolation. He  established  a  much  more  sure  and 
certain  witness.  Men  were  not  forced  to  rely  on 
manuscripts,  but  were  to  have  a  living  witness  of  His 
resurrection.  Christianity  extends  throughout  the 
world.  However  separated,  it  is  solidly  in  accord  in 
one  matter.  Throughout  the  world  on  the  first  day 
of  the  week  all  Christians  assemble  to  worship.  They 
have  done  so  from  the  beginning.  "  Upon  the  first 


48  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

day  of  the  week  the  disciples  came  together  to  break 
bread."  l  And  now  everywhere  on  the  first  day  we 
hear  the  church  bells  calling  men  to  worship.  How 
are  we  to  account  for  this  fact?  Christianity  rose  out 
of  Judaism.  The  Jew  with  the  strictest  observance 
sacredly  guarded  the  seventh  day  of  the  week.  God 
Himself  had  bidden  him  so  to  keep  it,  and  its  obliga- 
tion had  the  awful  sanction  of  Sinai.  The  Christian 
Church  began  keeping  another  day  which  in  time  su- 
perseded the  Jewish  Sabbath.  What  right  had  it  so 
to  do  ?  Something  as  tremendous  as  the  proclamation 
of  the  law  on  Sinai  could  alone  be  its  warrant.  We 
know  the  reason.  On  the  third  day  Christ  rose  from 
the  dead.  Christians  kept,  therefore,  the  first  day  of 
the  week  and  called  it  "  the  Lord's  Day."  2  It  stands 
as  a  witness  of  the  resurrection.  It  declares  that 
such  was  the  universal  belief  from  the  beginning,  and 
that  it  was  on  the  third  day  Christ  rose. 

In  examining  the  proofs  of  the  resurrection,  we 
find  it  gains  credibility  from  the  attacks  unbelievers 
and  hostile  critics  have  made  upon  it.  It  has  been 
said,  for  instance,  that  Christ  did  not  really  die.  He 
swooned  and  became  numb,  and  in  that  condition  was 
placed  in  the  tomb.  The  coolness  of  the  stony 
chamber  stayed  the  hemorrhage,  the  aromatic  odor 
of  the  spices  with  which  He  was  embalmed  restored 
animation.  Somehow,  the  manner  not  explained, 
He  got  out  of  the  tomb  after  some  days,  and  rejoined 
the  disciples.  The  disciples  deceived  themselves 
into  calling  it  a  resurrection,  and  He  Who  was  the 
Truth  itself  let  them  cultivate  this  delusion.  Then 

i  Acts  xx.  7.  a  Rev.  i.  10. 


THE   GREAT   CREDENTIAL  49 

He,  to  help  on  the  fraud,  went  away  and  hid  Himself 
in  some  obscure  place  where,  unattended  and  uncared 
for  by  His  former  devoted  friends,  He  died. 

Now  it  has  a  bearing  on  His  resurrection  that  by 
the  ordering  of  Divine  Providence  our  Lord  met  His 
death  in  a  most  public  manner.  It  was  also  a  matter 
of  great  concern  to  a  large  number  of  persons  that  He 
should  be  put  to  death.  These  persons  were  of  the 
highest  rank  in  the  Church  and  State.  His  death 
was  a  great  public  event  upon  which  the  attention  of 
the  nation  was  concentrated.  It  was  at  the  time  of 
the  great  feast,  when  Jerusalem  was  crowded,  and  the 
many  thousand  pilgrims  were  encamped  on  her  hills. 
He  was  tried  before  the  High  Priest  and  the  Ecclesias- 
tical tribunal  and  examined  by  Herod  and  Pilate. 
He  was  condemned,  publicly  executed,  and  the 
Roman  centurion  made  an  official  report  of  His  death. 
To  make  His  death  doubly  sure,  His  side  was  pierced 
and  the  spear-thrust  touched  the  heart.  The  water 
and  the  blood  flowed  out.  If  He  had  been  in  a  swoon, 
the  piercing  would  have  extinguished  life,  while  the 
outflowing  water,  modern  science  tells  us,  indicated  that 
life  was  already  extinct.  There  is  no  question,  then, 
but  that  Christ  died  on  the  cross.  As  to  the  theory 
of  His  recovering,  Strauss  contemptuously  shattered 
it.  "  Would,"  he  said,  "  a  man  half  dead,  dragging 
himself  from  the  mortuary  cell,  so  weak  as  to  require 
medical  treatment  and  an  infinity  of  care,  who  finally,  in 
spite  of  all,  succumbs  to  his  sufferings,  would  he  have 
produced  on  the  Apostles  the  impression  that  He  was 
the  Prince  of  Life,  the  Vanquisher  of  the  Tomb?" 

Another  criticism  which  has  been  made  from  the 

4 


50  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

time  of  Celsus  asks  why  did  not  Christ  show  Himself 
to  Pilate,  Herod,  and  the  chief  priests?  This  objec- 
tion is  also  a  helpful  one,  for  its  answer  will  reveal  the 
character  and  purpose  of  the  resurrection.  But  first 
let  us  say  there  was  no  more  obligation  on  our  Lord's 
part  to  appear  to  them  than  to  doubters  of  any  suc- 
ceeding age  or  to  us.  But  there  were  moral  consid- 
erations why  Christ  should  not  appear  to  His  enemies. 
There  is  no  reason  to  believe  that  our  Lord's  appear- 
ance would  have  done  them  any  good.  They  were 
prepared  to  reject  every  kind  of  proof.  Their  state 
of  mind  is  shown  by  their  words.  "  That  deceiver 
said  while  He  was  yet  alive,  after  three  days  I  will 
rise  again."  J  They  were  prepared  for  Him.  Had 
our  Lord  appeared  they  would  have  either  denied 
His  identity,  or  said,  as  they  had  before,  it  was  the 
work  of  Beelzebub.  They  would  have  again  seized 
upon  Him  and  endeavored  to  subject  Him  to  further 
indignity.  It  was  better  for  them  that  Christ  should 
not  appear  before  them.  It  gave  to  any  in  whom  was 
aught  of  good  a  chance  of  restoration  by  an  act  of 
faith.  But  in  respect  of  ourselves,  so  far  as  evidence 
is  concerned,  their  testimony  would  have  been  of 
little  value.  They  were  not  competent  witnesses 
to  His  identity.  They  had  seen  Him  but  little. 
They  did  not  know,  as  the  Apostles  did,  His  look, 
movement,  gait,  manner,  voice.  It  required  previous 
and  intimate  acquaintance  with  these  in  order  to 
identify  the  Risen  Lord  with  the  Christ  of  Calvary. 
But  these  are  not  the  real  reasons  why  Christ  showed 
not  Himself  to  Pilate  and  the  high  priests. 
1  S.  Matt,  xxvii.  63. 


THE   GREAT   CREDENTIAL  51 

The  reason  was  He  had  finished  His  work  with  the 
world.  With  Him  creation  advances  into  a  new 
stage  of  development.  He  is  the  new  Fact  and  the 
Beginner  of  the  new  elevation  in  the  evolutionary 
process.  His  public  life  was  divided  into  three  periods, 
viz. :  His  prophetical  life,  His  priestly  and  suffering 
life,  and  his  risen  and  royal  life.  When  He  had 
attained  to  the  latter,  He  could  no  more  go  back  into 
those  that  preceded  it  than  the  world  having  attained 
one  geological  period  could  return  to  a  former  period. 
His  prophetical  ministry  to  the  world  was  closed  and 
He  could  not  return  to  it. 

Moreover,  it  is  well  to  remember  that  Christ's 
resurrection  was  not  a  return  to  His  former  life.  By 
His  own  will  He  had  separated  His  soul  from  His 
body.  "  I  have  power,"  He  said,  "  to  lay  down  My 
life  and  power  to  take  it  again."  It  was  not  by  the 
crucifixion  that  His  natural  life  was  taken,  but  the 
soul  was  separated  from  His  body  by  His  own  will. 
Yet  though  separated  from  each  other,  neither  was 
separated  from  His  Divinity.  For,  as  we  have  seen, 
He  was  Divine.  His  body  and  soul  hung  on  His 
Divinity  as  the  sword  and  sheath  to  the  warrior's  belt. 
As  the  drawing  of  the  sword  from  its  scabbard  sepa- 
rates neither  from  the  soldier,  so  the  human  soul  and 
body  of  Christ  when  separated  from  each  other  were 
not  separated  from  His  Divine  Person.  His  body  is 
in  the  tomb,  but  it  cannot  see  corruption.  It  was 
dead  only  in  the  sense  that  the  soul  was  separated  from 
it,  but  was  not  dead  as  cur  bodies  are  said  to  be  dead. 
For  it  was  living  with  an  indestructible  life  in  that 
it  was  united  to  the  Divine  Nature.  When  that  soul 


52  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

returned  and  re-entered  the  body,  then  it  rose.  He 
did  not,  as  in  the  cases  of  Jairus'  daughter  or  of 
Lazarus,  come  back  to  the  old  conditions  of  life.  He 
had  passed  through  death  and,  so  to  speak,  come  out 
on  the  other  side.  So  in  the  days  of  His  resur- 
rection He  gathers  about  Him  those  only  who  were 
His,  and  to  His  disciples  only  He  appears. 

Let  us  turn  to  other  corroborative  confirmation 
of  Christ's  words.  It  has  been  so  ordered  that  the 
resurrection  of  Christ  should  be  evidenced  both  by 
His  enemies  and  His  friends. 

Let  us  consider  first  the  proofs  offered  by  the 
former. 

They  are  five  in  number.  First,  if  Christ  did  not 
rise  from  the  dead,  His  enemies  were  bound  to  prove 
He  did  not  by  producing  the  body.  All  the  accounts 
agree  in  this,  that  Christ's  Body  having  been  taken 
down  from  the  cross  was  laid  in  a  new  tomb  which 
had  been  hewn  out  in  the  rock  and  "  wherein  was 
never  man  yet  laid."  The  Jews  went  to  Pilate, 
saying,  "  Sir,  we  remember  that  that  deceiver  said, 
After  three  days  I  will  rise  again.  Command,  there- 
fore, that  the  sepulchre  be  made  sure  until  the  third 
day."  "  Pilate  said,  ye  have  a  watch :  go  your  way, 
make  it  as  sure  as  ye  can.  So  they  went,  and  made 
the  sepulchre  sure,  sealing  the  stone,  and  setting  a 
watch."  Now  it  is  admitted  that  shortly  after  the 
Apostles  in  Jerusalem  preached  publicly  that  Christ 
had  risen.  His  body  had  been  taken  charge  of  by 
the  Jews.  They  were  responsible  for  it.  They  were 
therefore  bound  to  produce  it,  or  give  some  reasona- 
ble explanation  of  its  disappearance. 


THE   GREAT   CREDENTIAL  53 

The  explanation  given  furnishes  us  with  another 
proof.  The  story  told  of  the  disciples  coming  by 
night  while  the  soldiers  slept  and  taking  the  body  is 
on  the  face  of  it  a  lie.  It  is  incredible  that  the  Roman 
guard  would  all  have  been  asleep ;  and  if  so,  how 
could  they  have  known  who  were  the  perpetrators  of 
the  deed.  This  lie  is  effective  evidence  of  the  truth 
of  the  account  it  seeks  to  disparage. 

Again,  the  act  assigned  to  the  Apostles  is  without 
any  adequate  motive.  Why  should  they  wish  to  dis- 
turb the  tomb?  Either  they  believed  Christ  would 
rise  and  in  that  case  they  would  do  nothing,  or  they 
were  in  a  state  of  doubt,  and  still  less  would  they  take 
any  action ;  or  they  had  lost  all  hope  in  Christ  as  the 
Messiah,  then  surely  they  would  not  have  risked  their 
lives  for  a  man  or  a  cause  in  which  they  had  lost  all 
faith.  Terrified,  heart-broken,  crushed,  an  effort  to 
recover  the  body  is  the  last  thing  that  would  have 
entered  their  minds. 

One  of  the  latest  efforts  at  explanation  is  to  say 
that  the  Jews  took  away  the  body  themselves.  This 
theory  clears  the  Apostles  but  is  open  to  an  easy 
refutation.  Within  a  few  weeks  of  the  resurrection 
the  Apostles  were  arraigned  before  Annas,  the  high 
priest,  and  Caiaphas  and  John  and  Alexander,  and 
the  rulers  and  elders  and  scribes,  for  curing  the  im- 
potent man,  and  they  boldly  proclaimed  that  it  was 
by  the  power  of  Jesus  Christ  whom  God  raised  from 
the  dead.  It  is  inconceivable  if  the  Jews  themselves 
had  the  body  of  Christ  secreted  in  some  place,  thaf 
they  should  not,  by  producing  it,  have  crushed  and 
annihilated  the  hated  Christian  sect 


54          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

We  offer  as  another  proof  the  fact  that  Christ's 
enemies  admitted  the  truth  of  the  resurrection. 
When  the  Apostles  were  brought  before  them  they 
did  not  dispute  their  story.  If  the  tomb  was  still 
sealed  they  would  have  pointed  it  out.  If  they  had 
removed  the  body  they  would  have  produced  it. 
They  did  not  venture  on  what  they  knew  was  a  lie, 
and  accuse  the  Apostles  of  having  taken  it.  All 
they  did  was  to  forbid  the  Apostles  to  speak  in  the 
name  of  Jesus.  Their  inability  to  meet  the  testimony 
of  the  Apostles  is  an  admission  of  its  truth. 

But  finally,  many  of  Christ's  enemies  changed 
their  minds  and  believed.  Upon  the  preaching  of 
the  resurrection  of  Christ  by  S.  Peter  about  three 
thousand  converts  were  made ;  shortly  after,  we  read, 
"  Many  of  them  which  heard  the  Word  believed  ;  and 
the  number  of  men  was  about  five  thousand."  We 
learn  also  that  "  a  great  company  of  the  priests  were 
obedient  to  the  faith."  There  was  thus  a  very  large 
number,  eight  thousand  or  more,  who  believed  the 
Apostles'  witness.  Undoubtedly,  living  in  Jerusalem 
they  made  for  themselves  every  investigation.  The 
tomb  would  be  visited  by  every  tentative  believer. 
Every  person  connected  with  the  event  would  be 
obliged  to  tell  his  story  again  and  again  to  untired 
listeners.  The  intelligent  and  critical  inquirers  would 
be  sure  to  examine  and  cross-examine  every  detail. 
It  is  said  that  the  critical  faculty  was  not  so  developed 
as  in  our  day.  This  is  true  "  if  we  apply  it  to  certain 
departments  of  literary  evidence,  like  the  authorship 
of  a  book  or  the  value  of  a  local  tradition."  But  there 
is  no  truth  in  it  as  applied  to  a  public  fact,  like  that 


THE    GREAT   CREDENTIAL  55 

of  the  resurrection.  The  common-sense  methods 
of  rinding  out  whether  a  fact  of  this  kind  is  true  are 
unvarying,  and  were  possessed  equally  as  well  by  the 
Jews  of  that  day  as  by  ourselves.  Starting  out  as 
unbelievers,  this  large  jury  of  eight  thousand  persons 
became  convinced.  The  evidence  must  have  been 
irrefutable  to  have  converted  so  many. 

One  thing,  moreover,  is  sure,  that  had  the  Apostles 
merely  related  their  Galilean  experience,  they  would 
not  have  made  their  converts  in  Jerusalem.  If  they 
had  merely  declared  that  after  the  third  day,  when, 
as  they  alleged,  Christ  rose,  they  had  gone  away  into 
Galilee  and  there  He  had  been  seen  by  them,  their 
story  could  have  received  little  credence.  If,  it  would 
be  said,  He  rose  on  the  third  day,  why  did  He  not 
appear  to  some  one  or  some  persons  on  that  day? 
Why,  if  He  rose  here,  out  of  a  tomb  in  Jerusalem, 
did  He  not  appear  here  in  Jerusalem  ?  Why  wait  for 
days  and  then  appear  in  distant  Galilee  where  we 
cannot  go  and  examine  the  conditions  of  His  appa- 
rition? If  He  desired  that  we  here  in  Jerusalem 
should  believe,  by  all  these  reasons  He  was  bound  to 
appear  here.  It  is  foolish  to  suppose  that  the  report 
of  S.  Peter's  sermons  are  a  whole  account  of  what 
was  said  and  done  by  the  Eleven.  It  was  because 
the  Apostles,  dealing  with  individuals,  could  appeal 
to  all  the  facts  relating  to  His  entombment,  the  empty 
tomb,  the  failure  of  the  Jewish  rulers  to  produce  the 
body,  and  could  give  their  own  witness  to  His  appear- 
ances at  Jerusalem,  that  they  carried  conviction. 
Thus  Christ's  enemies  by  their  conversion  testify  to 
the  truth  of  His  resurrection. 


56  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

Let  us  now  turn  to  the  other  side  of  the  case. 
Here  the  evidence  divides  itself  into  two  sections. 
What  can  be  known  apart  from  the  narratives  in  the 
four  Gospels,  and  what  is  assured  us  by  them  ? 

In  the  first  category  we  are  struck  first  with  the  re- 
markable change  of  conduct  found  in  the  Apostles 
after  the  alleged  resurrection. 

The  death  of  Christ  had  confounded  the  Apostles 
and  crushed  their  hopes.  All  through  the  bright 
days  of  His  ministry,  when  the  sick  had  crowded 
about  Him  for  healing  and  the  common  people  had 
heard  Him  gladly,  they  had  looked  eagerly  forward 
to  the  restoration  of  the  Kingdom.  The  glories 
which  had  filled  the  visions  of  the  prophets  were 
upon  the  eve  of  their  accomplishment.  With  what 
buoyant  expectation  had  they  awaited  the  glorious 
triumph.  Suddenly  all  was  at  an  end.  A  most  dire 
calamity  had  taken  place.  Christ  had  succumbed  to 
His  enemies.  He  had  been  unable  to  extricate  Him- 
self. No  intervention  had  taken  place  from  heaven. 
The  Father  with  whom  He  had  associated  Himself 
had  not  come  to  His  assistance.  Like  a  miserable 
criminal  He  had  been  nailed  to  the  cross  of  shame, 
and  He  was  dead.  They  would  never  see  Him  again 
or  hear  His  voice.  He  was  completely  vanquished, 
and  there  was  an  end  of  all  their  hopes.  They  were 
shocked,  completely  cowed,  and  in  a  state  of  physical 
as  well  as  moral  collapse.  They  are  found  either 
wandering  away  or  huddled  together  in  a  room,  with 
locked  doors,  in  fear. 

In  what  vivid  contrast  is  their  appearance  after  the 
resurrection.  They  are  not  in  hiding,  they  are  pub- 


THE   GREAT   CREDENTIAL  57 

licly  in  the  Temple,  and  elsewhere,  preaching  Christ 
Risen.  They  are  standing  before  the  great  Ecclesias- 
tical Court,  and  do  not  hesitate  to  tell  Annas  and 
Caiaphas  and  all  the  assembled  dignitaries  that  they 
had  crucified  the  Christ.  They  declared  that  He  was 
risen  from  the  dead.  No  threats,  no  punishments 
can  make  them  cease  their  testimony.  No  one  of 
them  falters  from  his  great  truth-proclaiming  mission. 
They  go  everywhere,  throughout  the  world  proclaim- 
ing it.  They  manifest  the  sincerity  of  their  own  be- 
lief by  laying  down  their  lives  for  its  truth.  We  ask, 
What  wrought  this  change?  Whence  had  they  the 
sustaining  energy  of  their  conviction?  The  only  sat- 
isfactory answer  is  to  be  found  in  the  fact  of  the  res- 
urrection. No  interior  reminiscence,  no  shadowy  or 
imaginary  vision  could  have  kept  them  united.  Noth- 
ing but  hard  facts  could  have  enabled  them  to  bear 
necessarily  oft-recurring  questioning  and  mental  strain. 
It  was  because  Christ  had  risen  that  they,  resting  on 
that  adamantine  fact,  became  transformed  from  de- 
sponding cowards,  to  transcendent  heroes  and  martyrs. 
Another  corroboration  may  be  found  in  those  two 
sacraments  which  are  called  by  us  on  account  of  their 
universal  application,  "  Sacraments  of  the  Gospel." 
Christ,  as  we  have  said,  left  not  His  revelation  to  be 
evidenced  by  manuscripts  alone.  Christianity  came 
into  the  world  as  an  institution.  This  institution  is  a 
living  organism,  in  which  the  Holy  Spirit  dwells  and 
through  which  He  acts  and  speaks.  This  organism 
has  from  the  first  declared  that  on  the  third  day 
Christ  rose  from  the  dead.  It  does  this  to-day,  not 
only  by  her  creeds,  but  by  her  sacraments. 


58  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

Go  into  what  Christian  Church  you  will,  and  infants 
and  adults  are  all  baptized  by  the  same  formula,  viz. : 
"  In  the  Name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of 
the  Holy  Ghost."  Now,  at  the  beginning  of  each  dis- 
pensation we  find  God's  character  and  nature  re- 
vealed by  a  new  Name.  This  is  the  mark  upon  the 
Patriarchal  and  Mosaic  developments.  The  Christian 
is,  in  like  manner,  marked  by  the  new  and  wonderful 
revelation  of  the  Name  of  the  Triune  God.  It  lies  at 
the  basis  of  the  Christian  dispensation,  and  upholds 
it.  But  where  and  when  was  this  great  revelation 
made  by  Christ?  Not  during  His  life,  anterior  to  the 
resurrection.  There  is  nothing  said  about  it  in  His 
public  teaching.  It  was  made  after  His  resurrection, 
consequently  the  resurrection  was  not  a  myth  nor  an 
apparition  alone,  but  a  reality.  Every  baptism  is  a 
continuous  witness  that  Christ  rose  from  the  dead. 
For  it  teaches,  moreover,  that  Christians  are  buried 
with  Christ  and  risen  in  Him.  This,  it  is  obvious, 
would  be  an  unmeaning  metaphor  or  symbolism,  if 
Christ  rose  not  from  the  dead. 

The  Holy  Eucharist  bears  the  same  witness  to  the 
resurrection.  It  commemorates,  as  we  all  know,  the 
death  of  Christ.  But  why  should  the  Church  do  it,  if 
Christ  rose  not  from  the  dead  ?  Why  celebrate  the 
tragedy  in  which  Christ  closed  His  life,  which,  if  He 
rose  not  according  to  His  promise,  was  only  a  tragic 
failure  ?  If  He  rose  not,  the  words  and  action  of  the 
Eucharist  are  a  meaningless  sham  and  a  horrible 
falsification.  For  in  that  Holy  Service  are  neces- 
sarily said  the  words,  "  This  is  My  Body  which  is 
given  for  you,"  and  "This  Cup  is  the  new  covenant 


THE   GREAT   CREDENTIAL  59 

in  My  Blood."  The  words  give  the  lie  to  the  theory 
that  our  Lord  did  not  resume  His  body  and  does  not 
now  wear  it.  For  if  His  body  saw  corruption  and 
disappeared,  then  the  words,  "  The  bread  which  we 
break  is  it  not  a  participation  of  the  Body  of  Christ," 
would  not  be  true.  For  there  would  be  no  body  in 
existence,  spiritually  or  otherwise,  of  which  we  could 
be  partakers.  There  could  be  no  communion  of 
body  and  blood  that  had  ceased  to  exist.  The  Holy 
Eucharist  thus  bears  witness  to  the  death  and  resur- 
rection of  Christ.  The  two  witnesses  stand  before 
the  Temple  doors,  and  proclaim  that  Christ  has  risen. 
Again,  apart  from  the  Gospels,  we  have  an  inde- 
pendent witness  in  S.  Paul.  His  testimony  is  re- 
corded in  the  fifteenth  chapter  of  the  first  epistle  to 
the  Corinthians.  This  epistle,  written  about  A.  D.  57, 
is  accepted  by  all  critics  as  authentic.  There  he 
writes,  "  I  delivered  unto  you  first  of  all,  that  which  I 
also  received,  how  that  Christ  died  for  our  sins  ac- 
cording to  the  scriptures ;  and  that  He  was  buried, 
and  that  He  rose  again  the  third  day  according  to  the 
scriptures ;  and  that  He  was  seen  of  Cephas,  then  of 
the  twelve:  after  that,  He  was  seen  of  above  five 
hundred  brethren  at  once  ;  of  whom  the  greater  part 
remain  unto  this  present,  but  some  are  fallen  asleep. 
After  that,  He  was  seen  of  James ;  then  of  all  the 
Apostles.  And  last  of  all  He  was  seen  of  me  also,  as 
of  one  born  out  of  due  time."  S.  Paul  had,  so  we 
learn  from  himself,  received  his  information  directly 
from  S.  Peter  and  S.  James,  whom  he  had  visited  in 
Jerusalem  ;  we  have  thus  the  record  of  their  testimony 
apart  from  the  Gospel  narrative.  S.  Paul  adds  also 


60  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

his  own.  He  knew  the  difference  between  an  inter 
nal  spiritual  revelation,  a  vision,  and  an  external 
bodily  appearance  of  Christ.1  The  Lord  had  ap- 
peared to  him  bodily  in  the  Damascus  roadway,  and 
the  glory  of  His  ascended  body,  like  as  when  S. 
John  beheld  it,  had  blinded  him.  It  has  been  asked, 
why  does  not  S.  Paul  say  aught  concerning  the  visit 
of  the  holy  women  and  the  walk  to  Emmaus.  His 
omission  does  not  show  he  did  not  know  them.  He 
omits  them  because  he  is  not  giving  an  account  of  the 
resurrection,  but  is  telling  the  Corinthians  what  as 
Christians  they  were  bound  to  believe.  He  therefore 
states  the  fact  of  the  resurrection  and  cites  the 
authority  of  S.  Peter  and  the  Apostles  as  being  by 
Christ  authorized  witnesses  to  it.  It  was  on  their 
authority  and  witness  that  the  resurrection  on  the 
third  day  had  become  an  article  in  the  Creed,  which 
existed  before  the  Gospels  were  written.  S.  Paul 
adds  his  own  testimony,  and  cites  the  fact  of  which 
he  most  well  assured  himself,  that  five  hundred  per- 
sons could  testify  to  the  resurrection. 

Let  us  now  examine  the  Gospel  narrative. 

Each  evangelist  gives  an  account,  and  with  such 
differences  as  show  there  was  no  prearrangement 
These  differences,  then,  are  a  proof  of  their  credi- 
bility. Moreover,  under  the  guidance  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  they  were  intended  to  set  forth  different  as- 
pects of  Christ.  One  emphasizes  His  kingship,  an- 
other His  priesthood ;  one  dwells  on  His  humanity, 
another  on  His  divinity.  These  different  character- 
istics run  through  each  Gospel  from  the  beginning  to 
1  i  Cor.  i.  15. 


THE   GREAT   CREDENTIAL  61 

the  end.  They  consequently  differ  in  their  account 
of  the  resurrection.  S.  Matthew,  who  depicts  in  his 
Gospel  Christ  as  the  king  and  His  kingdom,  makes  the 
chief  event  in  the  resurrection  the  assembly  at  Galilee 
and  the  royal  mandate  of  Jesus :  "  All  power  is  given 
unto  me  in  heaven  and  on  earth.  Go  ye  therefore  and 
make  disciples  of  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  lo,  I  am  with  you  alway,  even  unto  the 
end  of  the  world."  S.  Luke,  who  brings  out  the 
priesthood  of  Christ,  has  nothing  to  say  of  Galilee, 
but  dwells  upon  the  recovery  and  appearance  to  S. 
Peter,  and  the  wandering  disciples,  and  the  making 
Himself  known  in  the  breaking  of  bread,  and  the 
command  that  repentance  and  remission  of  sins  should 
be  preached  to  all  nations ;  and  ends  with  lifting  up 
His  hands  and  blessing  them ;  and  their  continually 
abiding  in  the  temple.  S.  John,  the  evangelist  of 
the  Incarnation,  and  who  especially  sets  forth  the 
divinity  of  Christ,  gives  the  apparition  of  our  Lord 
both  at  Jerusalem  and  in  Galilee.  He  dwells  upon 
the  divine  side  of  His  resurrection,  on  the  evidence 
of  the  empty  tomb  and  the  grave  clothes,  which  first 
flashed  belief  into  his  soul,  on  the  interview  with 
Mary  Magdalene,  wherein  our  Lord  revealed  His 
gracious  humanity,  and  the  divine  sanctity  of  His 
nature.  "  Touch  me  not ;  for  I  am  not  yet  ascended 
to  my  Father."  "  I  ascend,"  not  unto  our  Father, 
but  to  "  my  Father  and  your  Father  and  to  my  God 
and  your  God."  S.  John  alone  records  the  mysteri- 
ous gift  of  peace  and  the  solemn  breathing  on  the 
Apostles,  their  wonderful  empowering,  "  Receive  ye 


62  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

the  Holy  Ghost  Whose  soever  sins  ye  remit,  they 
are  remitted  unto  them ;  and  whose  soever  sins  ye 
retain,  they  are  retained."  It  is  in  this  Gospel  of  the 
divinity  that  we  have  recorded  the  confession  of  St. 
Thomas,  "  My  Lord  and  my  God."  This  closes  the 
manifestation  in  Jerusalem.  In  Galilee  we  have  the 
last  miraculous  draft  of  fishes.  S.  John,  true  to 
the  spirit  of  his  evangel,  is  the  only  one  who  records 
this,  the  only  miracle  wrought  in  the  days  of  the 
resurrection.  It  is  the  only  miracle,  save  the  greater 
one  of  mercy,  by  which,  on  his  threefold  protestation, 
Christ  restores  Peter  to  his  apostleship  and  the 
Gospel  closes  with  the  promise  of  the  Divine  Lord 
that  He  will  come  again.  S.  Mark  is  the  delineator 
of  Christ  as  the  prophet  and  Son  of  Man.  His 
Gospel  is  shorter  than  the  others,  but  is  fuller  of 
detail  and  human  incident.  It  is  questioned  by  critics 
where  the  original  of  S.  Mark's  Gospel  closes.  If  it 
ends  at  the  sixteenth  chapter,  ninth  verse,  we  have  the 
empty  tomb,  an  angel  announcing  to  the  women  the 
resurrection.  If  it  ends  later,  there  is  a  brief  confir- 
mation of  the  Emmaus  incident,  and  a  description  of 
our  Lord  appearing  to  the  eleven  as  they  sat  at  meat, 
quite  characteristic  of  S.  Mark,  and  with  the  com- 
mand to  go  into  all  the  world  and  preach. 

We  thus  see  why  the  evangelists  do  not  give  the 
same  identical  accounts  of  the  resurrection.  One 
dwells,  like  S.  Matthew,  on  the  Galilean  manifestation, 
with  its  kingly  command ;  one,  like  S.  Luke,  on 
that  at  Jerusalem,  with  its  remission  of  sins  and 
benediction.  S.  Mark  brings  out  the  human  side  ; 
S.  John,  the  divine.  We  may  not  be  able  to  har- 


THE   GREAT  CREDENTIAL  63 

monize  all  the  details.  "  We  are  not  bound  to  de- 
mand identical  accounts  from  historians  who  were 
unequally  informed,  who  had  no  intention  of  recount- 
ing everything,  and  who,  moved  to  write  by  different 
motives,  distributed  the  events  in  different  order." 
The  accounts  given,  however,  do  not,  necessarily,  con- 
tradict each  other.  The  differences  fit  in  with,  and  are 
consistent  with,  the  characteristics  of  the  separate 
Gospel.  The  Gospel  narratives  thus  are  credible  and 
bear  witness  to  the  resurrection  of  Christ 

Let  us  now  look  at  some  details.  All  the  evangel- 
ists tell  us  of  the  visit  of  the  band  of  women  to  the 
tomb.  They  came  bringing  the  spices  they  had 
prepared.  They  find  the  stone  rolled  away  and  the 
tomb  empty.  They  seem  to  have  met  at  some  ap- 
pointed rendezvous.  They  set  off  together,  when 
we  may  suppose  that  either  Mary  Magdalene  goes 
ahead  as  an  advance  guard,  for  they  were  in  much 
fear,  to  see  that  the  way  was  clear,  or  that  the  others 
lingered  for  some  one  of  the  party  to  join  them,  or  went 
back  for  something  which  may  have  been  forgotten. 
This  accounts  for  the  Magdalene  arriving  alone  and 
first  at  the  tomb.  Finding  it  empty  she  immediately 
goes  by  some  other  way  to  find  Peter  and  John,  who 
were  probably  staying  together.  Meanwhile,  the  other 
women  arrive  and  are  addressed  by  an  angel,  who 
tells  them  Christ  is  risen.  They  depart  with  fear 
and  great  joy.  And  as  they  went  to  tell  His  dis- 
ciples, behold  Jesus  met  them,  saying,  "All  hail. 
And  they  came,  and  held  Him  by  the  feet,  and  wor- 
shipped Him."1 

i  S.  Matt,  xxviii.  8,  9. 


64  CHRISTIAN   AND  CATHOLIC 

Meanwhile,  Peter  and  John  arrive  and  examine 
the  condition  of  the  tomb  and  depart.  Then  Mary 
Magdalene,  who  has  followed,  sees  the  two  angels 
sitting,  the  one  at  the  head  and  the  other  at  the  feet, 
where  the  body  of  Jesus  had  lain.  They  address  her, 
"  Woman,  why  weepest  thou  ?  "  Her  memorable  reply 
need  not  be  repeated.  The  question  and  answer  show 
it  was  not  in  a  vision.  As  she  was  not  expecting  the 
resurrection,  there  was  no  suggestive  motive  which 
would  predispose  her  to  imagine  one.  With  loving 
slowness  so  as  not  to  overpower  or  suddenly  shock 
her,  Jesus  discloses  Himself.  During  all  the  resur- 
rection time  we  discern  Christ's  majestic  calmness 
and  dignity  coupled  with  personal  consideration  and 
tenderness.  It  is  the  same  Christ  who  delivered  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  testified  before  Pontius  Pilate, 
stooped  with  loving-kindness  to  the  fallen,  who 
calls  His  faithless  disciples  by  the  endearing  name  of 
"children,"  and  who  consoles  Mary.  "Jesus  saith 
unto  her,  Woman,  why  weepest  thou?  whom  seekest 
thou?"  And  she,  supposing  the  speaker  to  have  been 
the  gardener,  saith,  "  Sir,  if  thou  have  borne  Him  hence, 
tell  me  where  thou  hast  laid  Him  and  I  will  take  Him 
away.  Jesus  saith  unto  her,  Mary.  She  turned 
herself,  and  saith  unto  Him,  Rabboni ;  which  is  to 
say,  Master.  And  she  came  and  told  the  disciples 
she  had  seen  the  Lord." 

Not  less  interesting  and  confirmatory  is  the  visit  of 
the  two  Apostles  to  the  sepulchre.  They  run  both 
together.  Naturally  S.  John,  who  gives  us  the  ac- 
count, being  the  younger,  outruns  Peter  and  comes 
first  to  the  tomb.  With  his  meditative,  contemplative 


THE   GREAT   CREDENTIAL  65 

manner  he  stoops  down  and  looks,  then  pauses,  but 
does  not  go  in.  S.  Peter,  following,  with  his  eager, 
impulsive  nature,  enters  at  once,  gazes  about  and 
retires.  "  Then  went  in  also  that  other  disciple  which 
came  first  to  the  sepulchre  and  he  saw  and  believed."1 
The  interesting  question  that  arises  here  is,  what  did 
he  see  that  made  him  believe?  The  answer  is  to  be 
found  in  the  Eastern  manner  in  which  the  body  was 
wrapped  and  bandaged  for  interment.  A  hundred 
pounds  of  spices  had  been  used  and  the  body  then 
tightly  wound  in  linen,  made  fast  by  long  strips 
which  were  wound  under  and  over  the  body  and 
crossed  behind  and  before.  The  head  was  treated 
after  the  anointing  in  the  same  way  and  the  head- 
gear resembled  a  sort  of  covering  or  helmet.  Now 
what  was  it  S-  John  saw?  He  saw  the  linen  clothes. 
This  might  suggest  to  him  the  fact  that  the  body 
had  not  been  surreptitiously  removed.  Had  the  Jews, 
or  had  any  one,  taken  the  body  they  would  have  re- 
moved it  just  as  it  was.  The  myrrh  would  have 
caused  the  linen  clothes  to  adhere  closely  to  the  body, 
and  it  would  be  a  long  as  well  as  useless  task  to  re- 
move them.  The  body  could  not,  therefore,  have  been 
stolen.  But  this  would  not  account  for  the  convic- 
tion that  flashed  into  S.  John's  mind  that  Christ  was 
risen.  What  he  observed  was  that  the  grave  clothes  in 
which  the  body  had  been  wrapped  were  not,  as  is  given 
in  the  authorized  version,  "  Laid  by  themselves,"  but, 
as  in  the  Revised  Version,  simply  "  lying."  Lying,  as 
we  read  in  S.  Luke,  lying  alone,  /.  e.,  lying  empty.2  The 
clothes  had  gaved  in  and  were  lying  down  flat.  The 

1  S.  John  xx.  8.  a  S.  Luke  xxiv.  12. 


66  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

napkin  which  had  been  upon  His  head  was  rolled  up 
in  a  place  by  itself.  It  had  been  bound  and  bandaged 
about  the  head,  and  had  retained  its  helmet-like 
form.  It  was  not  rolled  up  like  a  ball,  but  held  the 
twisted  shape  it  had  received  and  now  stood  by  itself 
in  the  place  where  the  head  had  been.  It  is  not  un- 
likely, as  it  retained  some  marks  of  the  countenance 
of  our  Lord,  that  this  was  the  origin  of  the  ancient 
legend  of  S.  Veronica.  When  S.  John  saw  this 
arrangement  of  the  grave  clothes  there  was  only  one 
deduction  to  be  drawn.  No  body  could  have  been 
taken -out  of  those  clothes,  with  the  bandages  lying 
as  they  were,  nor  could  any  one  have  got  out  of 
them  without  disturbing  them.  When  Christ  rose, 
He  passed  through  them,  even  as  He  did  through  the 
tomb,  and  as  His  body  subsequently  came  through 
the  closed  doors.  So  John  saw  and  believed. 

It  is  but  fair  to  state  the  last  opposing  theory  of 
German  criticism.  It  is  that  there  are  two  accounts 
or  two  sets  of  appearances,  one  at  Jerusalem  and  the 
other  in  Galilee.  The  latter  is  found  in  S.  Matthew 
and  S.  Mark.  They  say  nothing  about  the  Jerusalem 
manifestations,  if  the  last  nine  verses  of  Mark  are 
omitted.  S.  Luke  and  S.  John  give  the  Judean  ap- 
pearances, and  say  nothing  of  Galilee,  if  we  may  omit 
the  last  chapter  of  John.  Now  these  two  accounts 
present  great  difficulties  in  the  way  of  harmonizing 
them.  We  must  therefore  give  up  one  or  the  other. 
The  Galilean  one  is  the  simpler  and  more  methodical, 
is  in  S.  Mark  and  should  therefore  be  adopted.  In 
confirmation  of  this  theory  we  have  the  testimony  of 
S.  Paul  who  does  not  mention  the  Jerusalem  inci- 


THE   GREAT   CREDENTIAL  67 

dents.  He  says  Christ  rose  on  the  third  day,  and 
that  He  appeared  to  Peter.  But  that  is  not  saying 
He  appeared  to  Peter  on  the  third  day.  The  disciples 
had  fled  terrified  to  Galilee.  There  Peter  imagined  he 
saw  Christ.  The  spirit  of  seeing  visions  became  con- 
tagious, so  the  Apostles  thought  they  saw  Him. 
They  came  back  to  Jerusalem,  kept  quiet,  settled 
down,  and  gradually  belief  in  the  resurrection  grew. 

We  have,  however,  seen  why  the  Gospel  narratives 
are  not  identical.  It  is  therefore  difficult  to  harmo- 
nize them.  Our  Lord  most  fittingly,  however,  appears 
both  in  Judea  and  in  Galilee.  S.  Paul  gives  not  a 
full  account  of  the  resurrection  but  adduces  the 
authorized  proof  of  it.  He  learned  from  S.  Peter 
himself  the  fact  of  our  Lord's  appearance  to  him.  S. 
Luke,  who  wrote  under  S.  Paul's  oversight,  is  the 
only  one  who  records  the  fact,  and  it  takes  place  not 
in  Galilee  but  in  Jerusalem.  The  Apostles  told  their 
story  publicly  and  at  once,  and  were  arrested  for  it. 
The  eight  thousand  at  Jerusalem  would  never  have 
been  converted  by  such  a  Galilean  tale.  The  ques- 
tions concerning  the  body,  where  it  was  if  Christ  had 
not  risen,  would  remain  unanswered.  This  theory 
does  not  hold  well  together.  It  leaves  the  credibility 
of  the  Gospel  narrative  unshaken. 

Let  us,  then,  draw  our  conclusion.  It  is  of  record 
that  S.  Peter  preached  at  Pentecost  that  Christ  had 
risen,  and  so  it  is  clear  that  the  story  was  not  a  myth. 
For  myths  grow,  but  this  account  did  not.  It  was 
stated  from  the  beginning. 

The  Apostles  declared  they  had  seen  the  Lord.  It 
was  not  then  a  spectral  illusion,  could  not  have  been 


68  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

a  ghost.  For  they  knew  the  voice,  touched  the  body, 
put  their  hands  into  His  side,  they  walked  with  Him, 
they  ate  with  Him.  He  said,  "  Handle  me,  and  see ; 
for  a  spirit  hath  not  flesh  and  bones,  as  ye  see  me 
have." 

As  it  was  not  a  ghost,  neither  was  it  a  reminiscence 
which  took  delusive  shape  in  their  minds.  They 
would  have  soon  got  tired  of  announcing  as  a  fact 
what  in  sober  moments  they  would  know  was  but  a 
mental  illusion.  It  could  not  have  been  a  reminis- 
cence for  the  further  reason  that  Christ  went  on  with 
His  teaching.  He  opened  their  minds  to  the  under- 
standing of  the  scriptures.  He  revealed  the  new 
name  of  God,  which  they  knew  not  before.  He  gave 
them  the  royal  power  of  administering  absolution. 
He  established  the  sacrament  of  Holy  Baptism. 

He  rose  from  the  dead  and  was  with  the  Apostles 
off  and  on  during  forty  days.  Rising  in  triumph  over 
death,  it  was  but  natural,  as  the  benefit  was  for  all 
the  world,  He  should  appear  in  Judea  and  in  Galilee 
of  the  Gentiles. 

The  Apostles  saw  Him  in  the  house,  by  the  lake, 
in  the  evening,  at  daybreak,  at  all  times,  and  listened 
to  His  instruction  and  received  His  gifts  which  were 
embodied  in  institutions. 

Then  He  led  them  out  to  Bethany,  and  according 
to  His  promise  that  He  would  ascend  into  heaven, 
openly,  in  broad  daylight,  He  ascended  till  the  cloud 
received  Him  out  of  their  sight.  Not  only  did  He 
promise  it,  but  one  whole  Book  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, which  might  be  called  the  Gospel  of  the 
Ascension,  bears  witness  to  it.  Thus  He  the  divinely 


THE   GREAT  CREDENTIAL  69 

sent  and  commissioned  Teacher,  whose  words  and  life 
prove  His  divinity,  rose  from  the  dead  and  ascended 
to  the  Right  Hand  of  Power. 

What  a  light  this  Great  Credential  throws  upon  His 
whole  life.  He  was,  as  St.  John  declares,  the  Word 
Incarnate.  God  had  wrapped  round  His  divine  na- 
ture our  humanity,  that  through  it  He  might  set  forth 
the  Divine  Life. 

We  need  not  be  staggered  by  the  consideration 
that  this  planet  is  a  small  one.  God  loves  little 
things.  He  loves  to  hide  Himself.  He  comes  to  the 
little  nation.  He  is  born  in  the  little  town.  So  He 
comes  to  the  small  planet.  Yet  as  He  comes  into  the 
world  for  all  men,  He  comes  into  creation  for  the 
benefit  of  the  whole  of  it.  The  universe  is  a  unit  and 
God  enters  it  that  He  might  unite  all  things  in  Heaven 
and  earth  in  Himself. 

He  has  thus  given  us  proof  of  His  divine  nature 
by  His  resurrection.  No  wonder  that  one  who  had 
so  supernatural  an  exit  from  this  world  should  have 
an  equally  supernatural  entrance.  As  our  first  parents 
could  not  have  been  derived  from  a  preceding  pair, 
but  must  have  been  singly  produced,  so  when  Creation 
advances  to  a  new  stage,  the  new  Head  and  Type  is 
produced  in  like  unique  manner.  Christ  Himself 
bore  testimony  to  His  own  pre-existence.  Blessed  S. 
Joseph  declares  he  is  not  His  earthly  father.  The 
sanctity  of  the  ever  Blessed  Virgin  bears  witness  to 
the  testimony  S.  Luke  has  recorded.  God  the  Word 
became  Flesh. 

What  wonder,  then,  that  when  He  was  born  all 
creation  was  present  at  His  birth  to  honour  it.  The 


;o  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

stars,  created  it  may  be  for  the  very  purpose,  shone 
at  His  birth.  One  especially  formed  or  angel-borne 
guided  the  Magi  from  their  Eastern  home.  The 
angel  hosts  and  chorus  from  off  the  great  rood 
screen  of  the  skies,  jewelled  and  lit  with  its  many 
thousand  lamps,  chanted  the  glad  gospel  of  peace  and 
of  good-will  to  man.  All  nations  were  represented 
by  Jew  and  Gentile;  the  shepherds  and  the  kings 
came  to  do  Him  homage.  The  high  and  low,  the 
rich  and  poor,  man  and  woman,  surround  His  cradle 
throne.  There,  too,  are  the  kneeling  or  waiting  cattle, 
and  the  sheep  of  the  flock,  and  the  produce  of  the 
earth,  the  straw  of  the  manger,  and  the  mineral  gifts 
of  the  kings.  When  the  Lord  of  creation  entered  it, 
most  fittingly  all  creation  was  representatively  present. 
Most  naturally,  too,  when  He  entered  on  His  work, 
all  creation  acknowledged  Him  as  its  Lord.  The 
winds  and  waves  obey  His  command.  He  controls 
the  law  of  gravitation  by  a  greater  law,  and  walks 
on  the  sea.  He  is  Master  of  the  law  of  the  extension 
of  matter,  and  multiplies  the  loaves.  The  fishes  obey 
His  behests  and  gather  in  crowds  into  the  net.  The 
fig  tree  withers  away  at  His  condemnation.  The 
Roman  soldiers  go  back  and  fall  to  the  ground  at 
His  simple  word.  Sickness  and  disease  flee  before 
Him  who  is  the  life  itself.  The  blind  regain  their 
sight,  the  lame  walk,  the  lepers  are  healed,  death 
gives  up  its  prey  and  the  dead  are  raised. 


CHAPTER   V 

CHRIST'S   TEMPTATION 

IT  is  easy  to  imagine  a  reader  now  saying,  you  have 
surrounded  Christ  with  a  divine  halo,  but  in  doing 
so  you  have  taken  Him  away  from  me.  I  have  been 
drawn  to  Him  by  the  attractions  of  His  crystalline 
character,  the  inspirations  of  His  exalted  teaching,  and 
His  wondrous,  never-exhausted  sympathy.  He  would, 
I  feel  sure,  know  my  case,  the  baffling  impotences  of 
my  mental  powers,  the  tortuous  ways  of  my  self- 
deceiving  heart.  His  invitation  was  world  wide, 
"  Come  unto  me,  all  ye  that  travail  and  are  heavy 
laden,  and  I  will  refresh  you,"  and  "  Whosoever 
cometh  to  me,  I  will  in  no  wise  cast  out." 

But  if  He  was  divine  how  was  it  possible  for  Him 
to  be  tried  and  tempted?  If  temptation  was  only 
like  a  dart  thrown  against  some  invulnerable 
shield,  how  can  He  know  what  it  is?  How  sympa- 
thize with  us,  round  whom,  from  youth  to  age,  temp- 
tation's "  poisoned  arrows  hurtle,"  changing  with 
advancing  years,  but  ever  present.  How  know  of 

That  dreary  sickness  of  the  soul ; 

When  all  the  generations  of  mankind, 

With  all  their  purposes,  their  hopes  and  fears, 

Seem  nothing  truer  than  those  wandering  shapes 

Cast  by  a  trick  of  light  upon  the  wall. 


72  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

How  know  of  those  fierce  contentions  between  clam- 
orous desire  and  exacting  duty,  the  lassitude  of 
weakness  and  the  necessity  of  exertion ;  the  enticing 
influences  of  affection  and  the  calls  to  self-sacrifice ; 
the  anger-arousing  exasperations  of  false  accusations 
and  the  law  of  Christian  charity? 

How  can  He  be  an  example  to  us  if  it  was  impos- 
sible for  Him  to  know  our  strain  of  trial?  Yet  on 
the  other  hand,  if  He  was  divine,  how  can  He  be 
tempted?  There  is  no  root  nor  tendency  to  lawless- 
ness in  any  portion  of  His  nature,  as  there  is  in  us,  to 
which  temptation  can  appeal.  So  we  are  seemingly 
shut  up  in  this  trying  dilemma.  Either  He  could  be 
tempted  and  thus  was  not  divine,  or  He  could  not  be 
tempted  and  therefore  He  is  no  example  for  us. 

In  addressing  ourselves  to  the  solution  of  this 
problem,  we  must  first  say  that  it  is  revealed  truth 
that  Christ  was  tempted.  "  He  was  in  all  points 
tempted  like  as  we  are,  yet  without  sin."  Therefore,  of 
the  reality  of  His  temptations  there  can  be  no  doubt. 
They  are  a  ground  of  our  supplication  in  the  litany. 
We  not  only  plead  by  Christ's  priceless  Cross  and 
Passion,  but  by  His  temptation.  "  By  thy  Baptism, 
Fasting,  and  Temptation,  good  Lord,  deliver  us." 

How,  then,  can  we  reconcile  His  temptation  with 
His  absolute  sinlessness?  How  can  one  who  is  holy, 
harmless,  undefiled,  separate  from  sinners,  be  tempted? 
We  must  admit  that  the  mere  presentation  of  a  temp- 
tation would  not  satisfy  the  conditions  of  the  case. 
Yet  it  is  in  this  way  that  some  theologians  have  stated 
it.  To  be  in  a  real  and  true  sense  a  temptation  there 
must  not  only  be  something  placed  before  the  will, 


CHRIST'S   TEMPTATION  73 

but  a   conscious   strain   between   conflicting   desires 
requiring  a  choice. 

There  were  three  kinds  of  temptations  to  which  our 
Lord  while  being  perfectly  sinless  was  perpetually 
exposed.  First,  He  was  bound  to  be  true  to  the 
human  nature  He  had  assumed.  Human  nature  in 
its  struggle  for  righteousness  had  been  defeated.  It 
bore  the  marks  of  its  defeat  upon  it  in  its  obvious 
weakness  to  rectify  itself.  Christ  came  on  behalf  of 
man  to  fight  over  his  lost  battle  and  to  reverse  his 
defeat.  Therefore,  He  took  upon  Himself  that  nature, 
and  became  man.  He  became  thus  the  second  Adam, 
or  new  Head  of  a  new  race.  As  temptation  is  a 
necessity  of  a  progressive  life,  affecting  angels  and 
men,  Christ  as  the  second  Adam  had  to  be  tried. 

The  first  source  of  trial  would  be  in  our  composite 
nature.  He  had,  like  us,  to  suffer  from  hunger,  thirst, 
and  weariness.  There  is  no  sin  in  experiencing  any 
of  these  natural  desires,  and  they  may  be  severe. 
We  know  our  Lord  was  an  hungered  after  His  great 
forty  days'  fast.  It  left  Him  a  wan  and  emaciated 
figure.  We  see  how  weary  He  was  when  the 
Apostles  took  Him  as  He  was  into  the  boat,  or  when 
He  sat  so  tired  at  Samaria's  well.  But  the  unrelax- 
ing  calls  of  duty  ever  triumphed  over  the  feebleness 
of  the  flesh. 

The  peculiarity  of  our  Lord's  temptations  arises 
from  the  fact  that  he  possessed  a  divine  power  by 
which  all  bodily  pains  could  be  set  aside.  This  was 
a  second  and  a  persistent  source  of  temptation.  It 
was  the  temptation  to  use  His  divine  power  for 
the  reliefer  the  support  of  His  human  nature.  Now 


74  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

this  was  the  very  thing  He  was  not  to  do.  He  had 
assumed  our  nature  and  identified  Himself  with  it  to 
retrieve  its  defeat.  He  was  to  present  to  God  human 
nature  as  perfectly  obedient  to  the  divine  will.  Thus 
He  was  to  fulfil  the  original  conception  of  God  in 
creating  a  creature  endowed  with  free  will,  who  should 
reflect  His  image.  It  would  therefore  have  violated 
the  very  purpose  for  which  He  came,  if  He  had  used 
His  divine  power  to  protect  or  defend  Himself.  In 
Him  humanity  was  to  triumph.  It  was  to  rise  to  the 
height  God  had  designed  for  it.  It  was  to  be  victori- 
ous in  the  necessary  strife.  His  humanity  might  be 
aided  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  His  followers  may  be. 
But  He  must  not  draw  on  the  resources  of  His  divinity 
to  aid  Him  in  the  struggle.  He  may  indeed  do  so  in 
aid  of  others.  He  may  work  miracles  for  others' 
benefit.  He  may  multiply  the  loaves  to  feed  the  fam- 
ishing multitude.  But  He  must  not  turn  the  stones 
into  bread  to  save  His  own  life.  He  may  assuage  the 
pains  of  the  diseased,  open  the  eyes  of  the  blind,  raise 
the  dead,  but  not  for  a  moment  may  He  use  that 
divine  power  for  His  own  deliverance.  It  is  true  that 
when  His  enemies  take  up  stones  to  kill  Him  He 
hides  Himself  and  goes  out  of  the  temple,  but  this  is 
not  in  the  spirit  of  shunning  death,  but  of  saving  Him- 
self for  that  more  cruel  death  to  which  He  was 
appointed. 

Again,  a  third  source  of  temptation  arose  from  the 
fact  that  the  plan  of  the  world's  redemption  had  been 
laid  down  for  Him.  He  found  in  Holy  Scripture  His 
Redeeming  life-work  traced  out.  This  explains  how 
frequently  it  is  said  "  that  the  scripture  might  be  ful- 


CHRIST'S  TEMPTATION  75 

filled."  He  cast  His  human  mind  into  its  mould. 
He  will  not  take  the  offered  anaesthetic  at  the  Cruci- 
fixion, that  the  Word  of  God  might  be  kept.  He  was 
obedient  from  childhood  to  this  rule,  which  governed 
His  whole  life.  He  was  to  fulfil  every  prophecy  and 
every  type  of  the  promised  Messiah.  He  will  not 
descend,  before  the  assembled  worshippers  in  the 
temple,  from  its  pinnacle  and  so  gain  their  adher- 
ence. He  will  not  take  the  kingdoms  of  the  earth 
from  Satan,  by  doing  homage,  because  He  is  to  win 
the  kingdom  by  a  victory  over  him.  That  victory 
was  to  be  won  on  the  battle-field  of  the  cross.  It  had 
been  ordained  that  the  feet  that  should  press  the  eter- 
nal stairway  should  be  marked  by  the  nail-prints,  and 
the  hand  that  should  grasp  the  royal  sceptre  should 
be  a  pierced  hand. 

Our  Lord  was  therefore  under  a  perpetual  strain, 
first  by  reason  of  the  composite  human  nature  as- 
sumed, and  next  by  a  more  trying  one  through  union 
of  that  human  nature  with  His  divinity;  and  also  by 
virtue  of  the  plan  ordained  for  man's  redemption  to 
which  He  was  to  conform. 

These  causes  led  at  special  times  and  crises  to 
more  severely  felt  trials.  When,  for  example,  He 
was  so  exhausted  after  His  first  prolonged  fast.  Try 
and  think  what  condition  His  body  was  in  after  that 
terrifically  weakening  mortification.  Painters  have 
loved  to  delineate  the  Christ  in  a  form  of  exceeding 
grace  and  beauty.  But  He  began  His  ministry  in 
this  emaciated  condition,  and  His  three  years'  labors, 
having  no  place  wherein  to  lay  His  head,  and  having 
at  times  to  supply  His  bodily  wants  with  the  raw  ears 


76  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

of  corn,  left  Him  so  worn  that  at  the  crucifixion  His 
enemies  stand  jeering  at  Him. 

But  why  did  He,  unlike  a  human  teacher  who  knows 
His  life  is  a  valuable  one,  so  begin  His  ministry?  One 
reason  undoubtedly  was  that  as  has  been  stated  He 
came  to  identify  Himself  with  us  and  fight  over  again 
for  us  our  lost  battle.  So  He  took  His  stand  beside 
us,  where  our  sins  had  placed  us,  not  in  paradise,  but 
in  the  wilderness.  He  places  Himself  without  the 
gates  kept  by  the  flaming  Cherubim  to  win  for  man 
an  entrance  into  the  tree  of  life.  But  another  reason 
was  that  by  taking  on  Himself  the  results  of  sickness 
He  might  be  in  all  points  tempted  as  we  are,  yet 
without  sin.  He  made  His  body  to  feel  weakness 
and  racking  pain,  that  no  sufferer  but  should  know  He 
had  felt  the  same.  Then  when  His  bodily  nature  has 
been  so  reduced,  as  we  may  say  to  its  last  gasp,  He 
is  assailed  by  a  most  subtle  temptation.  The  temp- 
tation to  satisfy  nature  in  order  to  save  His  life  for  the 
sake  of  others.  To  exert  His  rightful  divine  power 
and  turn  the  stones  into  bread.  Why  not?  What 
withheld  Him?  This:  He  was  to  be  true  to  the 
nature  He  had  assumed.  If  for  one  moment  He  had 
ever  failed  in  being  true  to  the  conditions  of  His 
humanity,  His  work  for  man's  redemption  had  been 
undone. 

We  are  apt  to  think  that  only  on  the  one  occasion 
of  the  wilderness  was  our  Lord  tempted.  It  was 
indeed  a  special  trial.  So  it  was  when,  in  more 
subtle  ways  than  Satan's  argument,  there  came  from 
a  loved  disciple  the  insinuating  plea,  "  Be  it  far  from 
Thee,  O  Lord."  The  strength  of  the  rebuke  to  Peter 


CHRIST'S   TEMPTATION  77 

tells  us  of  the  strength  of  the  appeal  he  made  to 
Christ.  Satan  left  Him,  we  know,  for  a  season  only, 
for  He  said  to  His  Apostles,  "Ye  are  they  which  have 
continued  with  me  in  my  temptations." 

It  is  therefore  for  us  to  realize  that  our  Lord  was 
under  constant  fire  and  a  perpetual  strain.  In  this 
His  trial  differed  from  that  of  the  angels  and  of 
man.  God  placed  before  the  angels  their  trial,  but 
it  was  only  one.  He  made  it  short.  The  obedient, 
humble,  and  faithful  rose  by  their  choice  of  God  into 
the  enfolding  protection  of  the  Divine  Light.  He 
gave  to  the  first  Adam  one  simple  test  of  obedience, 
by  which  he  might  secure  his  proffered  supernatural 
reward.  But  the  second  Adam  had  no  such  brief 
probation.  It  lasted  from  infancy  to  the  end. 

It  affected  and  tried  all  portions  of  His  human 
nature.  So  it  was  with  the  test  presented  to  the  first 
Adam.  Adam  was  to  abstain  from  the  forbidden 
fruit.  This  was  a  discipline,  however  slight,  of  the 
body.  He  was  to  remember  the  particular  tree  and 
the  Lord's  command,  and  this  was  a  discipline  of  the 
memory.  He  was  to  obey  the  injunction  not  to  eat, 
and  this  involved  the  submission  of  the  reason  and 
the  will.  The  tree  became  thereby  his  offering,  by 
which  he  offered  himself.  It  tested  all  portions  of  his 
nature.  So  it  was  with  Christ  He  came  and  passed 
through  all  the  stages  of  our  mortal  life.  He  came 
not  as  the  first  Adam  did,  in  the  fulness  of  His 
powers.  Christ  lay  first  of  all  a  helpless  infant  in  the 
arms  of  His  Blessed  Mother.  He  is  to  sanctify  every 
human  stage  and  is  to  be  true  to  its  conditions.  He 
joined  our  human  nature  to  His  divine  nature  in 


78  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

His  one  personality.  So  He  who  lies  in  Mary's  arms 
is  God.  But  He  must,  to  redeem  us,  be  true  to  the 
conditions  of  infancy.  Neither  His  Mother's  loving 
caress  nor  threatened  danger  must  lead  Him  to 
break  the  law  of  infancy  by  word  or  sign.  He  is 
God  bound,  so  far  as  this  exercise  of  His  omnipo- 
tence is  concerned,  in  swaddling  bands.  His  mental 
powers  undergo  the  same  discipline.  He  is  subject 
to  earthly  parents,  though  He  knows  how  mistaken 
they  often  are  in  their  judgments.  He  obeys  S. 
Joseph  in  the  carpenter's  shop,  though  assured  that 
the  directions  he  gives  are  far  from  the  most  scien- 
tific and  correct.  He  submits  His  human  reason  to 
God's  will  as  revealed  for  Him  in  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures. He  follows  and  keeps  it  as  His  rule  of  life. 
He  surrenders  also  His  soul  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  and 
is  led  in  all  things  by  Him. 

He  comes  not  to  do  His  own  will  or  speak  His  own 
message.  "  As  I  hear,  so  I  speak."  "  The  Word  is 
not  mine,  but  His  that  sent  me."  In  all  ways  He  was 
to  be  tempted  like  ourselves.  As  He  was  to  subor- 
dinate His  reason  to  revelation,  so  was  He  to  sup- 
press and  discipline  a  rightful  mental  curiosity.  Of 
all  things  that  we  may  suppose  Him  most  anxious 
to  know  was  the  time  when  the  kingdom  would  be 
consummated  by  His  return  in  glory.  Yet  of  that 
day  and  that  hour  He  said,  "knoweth  no  man  but  my 
Father  only."  His  human  mind  could  have  known 
it  at  any  time,  for  it  was  united  with  His  divine 
nature.  It  enjoyed  perpetually  what  we  call  the 
beatific  vision.  He  had  but  to  look  into  it  and  this 
knowledge  would  have  been  His.  But  it  was  part  of 


CHRIST'S   TEMPTATION  79 

His  discipline  not  to  know.  He  must  keep  the  cur- 
tain drawn  down  over  that  source  of  information.  He 
must  undergo  the  temptation  that  besets  our  curiosity 
and  impatient  desire  to  know  what  has  not  been  re- 
vealed, or  seek  to  be  wise  above  that  which  is  fitting. 
What  a  help  to  us  in  learning  to  be  content  with  our 
partial  knowledge,  and  to  walk  by  the  light  of  faith. 
So  also  was  Christ  tried  in  His  affections.  There 
has  been  no  human  relation  so  radiantly  beautiful 
with  love  as  that  which  bound  Jesus  and  His  Blessed 
Mother. 

"  Two  were  they,  yet  in  heart  and  purpose  one. 
Two  like  the  brain  whose  halves  ne'er  think  apart, 
But  beat  and  answer  to  one  loving  heart." 

How  marvellous  must  have  been  that  intercourse  for 
thirty  years,  where  every  word  was  freighted  with 
divine  inspiration,  and  every  kiss  a  sacrament  of 
grace.  The  wonderful  degree  of  Mary's  sanctity  is 
seen  in  her  sublime  standing  in  perfect  faith  and 
self-surrendering  restraint  and  co-operation  with  Him 
at  the  foot  of  the  cross.  How  were  their  hearts  not 
united  to  one  another  by  divine  grace.  Can  we  not 
think  it  was  an  inexpressible  pain  to  our  Lord  when 
the  hour  came  that  He  must  separate  Himself  from 
her  and  go  forth  to  His  work?  It  was  a  trying 
ordeal  to  leave  her  who  had  no  other  support,  and  to 
abandon  her  to  God's  providential  care.  Such  in 
smaller  way  it  may  be  known  to  souls  who  leave  father 
and  mother,  husband  and  wife,  and  go  forth  at  duty's 
call.  Our  hearts  almost  break  under  the  struggle. 
But  He  would  be  tempted  in  all  points  like  as  we  are, 


80  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

and  teach  us  how  no  earthly  love  should  hold  us  back 
from  obeying  the  call  of  God. 

So  too  was  His  heart  pierced  and  tried,  with  Phari- 
sees and  scribes,  with  the  hardness  of  their  hearts, 
with  their  exasperating  contentions,  and  the  rejection 
by  His  own  people.  Is  there  a  more  heartrending 
scene  than  when  our  Lord  is  beheld  looking  with 
His  divine  tenderness  into  all  that  lay  before  Jeru- 
salem? We  see  Him,  the  strong  Man,  breaking  down 
in  tears  over  it.  "  O  Jerusalem,  Jerusalem,  thou  that 
killest  the  prophets  and  stonest  them  which  are  sent 
unto  thee,  how  often  would  I  have  gathered  thy 
children  together,  even  as  a  hen  gathereth  her 
chickens  under  her  wings,  and  ye  would  not!  " 

No  portion  of  our  Lord's  nature  escaped  its  trial. 
His  moral  nature  as  well  as  His  intellectual  one  and 
His  affections.  To  see  this  we  must  follow  Him  step 
by  step  through  the  indignities  of  trial.  See  how  His 
persecutors  blindfolded  Him,  hustled  Him  about  the 
room,  jeered  at  Him,  mocked  Him,  how  one  with 
terrible  energy  inflicted  a  blow,  and  another  spat  in 
His  face.  We  know  how  indignant  we  should  feel 
if  we  saw  a  friend  subjected  to  such  insults.  We 
know  what  feelings  of  anger  would  arise  within  us  if 
we  were  the  subject  of  such  outrages.  And  this  feel- 
ing would  not  in  itself  be  wrong.  Anger  at  what  is 
wrong,  said  the  great  Butler,  is  but  a  reflection  of  the 
righteous  wrath  of  God.  It  is  right  for  us  to  feel 
indignant  at  cruelty  and  wickedness,  and  we  are  want- 
ing if  it  is  not  so.  Now  our  Lord  knew  who  He  was 
and  what  was  due  to  Himself.  He  was  God,  whom 
angels  and  saints  adore.  He  might  for  our  sakes 


CHRIST'S   TEMPTATION  81 

lay  aside  His  glory,  but  He  could  not  lay  aside  the 
dignity  of  His  royal  person.  And  beyond  our  con- 
ception of  it,  He  felt  the  wrong  that  was  done  Him. 
God,  we  must  remember,  does  not  feel  less  because 
He  is  so  great,  but  the  refinement  of  His  moral 
nature  causes  Him  to  feel  more.  Christ  felt  the  in- 
sults. But  why  does  He  not  resent  them?  Why 
not  utter  some  word  of  condemnation?  Because  it 
had  been  ordained  for  Him  that  He  was  to  be  both 
priest  and  victim.  He  was  to  be  the  Lamb  of  God 
who  before  His  shearers  was  not  to  open  His  mouth. 
There  was  thus  the  righteous  indignation,  repressed 
by  the  duty  of  His  being  the  victim. 

If  He  is  tried  in  His  moral,  so  is  He  in  His 
spiritual  nature.  He  had  lived  all  His  human  life 
with  His  soul  in  union  with  God  and  in  the  enjoy- 
ment of  the  beatific  vision.  It  gave  Him  that 
majestic  calmness  and  inward  peace  that  neither 
inquisitorial  questions  nor  the  howlings  of  the 
maddened  mob  could  disturb.  His  soul,  like  some 
moon-lit  lake,  was  ever  reflecting  the  face  of  His 
Father.  But  there  came  a  time  when  the  awful 
vision  of  the  world's  sins  and  sinfulness  passed  be- 
fore His  soul.  He  had,  to  save  it,  identified  Himself 
with  a  lost  race.  He  had  been  baptized,  sinless  as 
He  was  in  Himself,  with  the  baptism  of  repentance. 
He  had  come  to  be  the  representative  penitent,  and 
to  do  penance  on  humanity's  behalf.  We  see  Him 
doing  this,  bent  beneath  the  olive  trees  of  Geth- 
semane.  He  beholds  the  sins  of  the  race,  and,  as 
if  it  were  some  filthy  garment  taken  from  a  leper's 
dead  body,  He  wraps  it  about  Himself.  He  feels 


82  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

that  wretchedness  of  heart  and  wrong  done  to  God 
our  Father  by  our  wrongdoings.  Rather,  as  if  He 
were  the  guilty  one,  for  our  sins,  which  He  makes  His 
own,  He  weeps  repentant  tears  of  blood.  We  shall 
never  learn  how  to  repent  as  we  should  till  we  kneel 
beside  Him  there.  Then  was  His  soul,  that  had 
been  so  full  of  gladness,  sorrowful  even  unto  death. 
And  so  there  came  a  conflict  we  cannot  measure,  but 
a  real  one,  ensuing  in  "  not  my  will  but  Thine  be 
done." 

No  less  terrible  is  that  trial  which  awaits  Him  on 
Calvary.  Souls,  Christian  souls,  often  experience  the 
trial,  and  with  it  the  temptations,  of  spiritual  desola- 
tion. They  feel  as  though  God  had  forsaken  them. 
Their  hearts  are  withered  and  dry.  They  are  in  the 
darkness  and  the  great  desolation.  But  did  He  not 
pass  that  way  too?  Did  He  not,  beyond  what  we  can 
measure,  feel  that  loss?  In  those  saddest  moments 
of  the  world's  history,  the  Divine  Sufferer  exclaims, 
"  My  God,  my  God,  why  hast  thou  forsaken  me?" 
It  reveals  a  spiritual  trial.  It  reveals  also  a  victory 
of  faith. 

Thus  in  all  portions  of  His  being  and  in  all  His 
relations  to  God  and  man  was  He  tried.  It  was 
a  persistent  series  of  temptations,  every  one  of 
which  resulted  in  a  victory  and  every  victory  in  the 
development  of  a  virtue.  For  He  was  not  only  to 
win  our  lost  battle,  but  to  be  the  source  of  new  vir- 
tues to  the  race.  Therefore,  well  may  we,  having 
His  numberless  victories  in  mind,  adoringly  sing, 
"  Crown  Him,  crown  Him  with  many  crowns." 

He  not  only  can  sympathize  with  us  in  all  our  trials, 


CHRIST'S   TEMPTATION  83 

but  by  His  temptations  borne  for  our  sake  He  shows 
His  love  towards  us.  We  are  often  baffled  by  the 
mystery  of  pain.  The  child  cries  out  in  its  suffering 
to  His  Heavenly  Father,  "  Why  did  Thou  make  us 
thus  ? "  We  in  part  understand  this  plague  and 
torment  by  seeing  that  it  develops  character.  With- 
out it  there  could  be  no  manly  heroism,  no  friendly 
sympathy.  The  common  danger  and  suffering  binds 
comrades  together  more  closely  than  any  bond  of 
gold.  It  has  been  said  no  parents  know  how  much 
they  love  each  other  till  they  stand  by  the  grave 
of  their  child.  For  pain  borne  for  another  is  love's 
highest  expression.  We  may  manifest  our  love  for 
each  other  by  words  that  burn  in  poets'  brains.  We 
may  show  our  love  by  gifts  most  costly  and  rare. 
But  love  finds  its  most  perfect  expression  in  suffer- 
ing. "  Greater  love  has  no  man  than  this,  that  a  man 
lay  down  his  life  for  his  friend."  Therefore  it  was 
that  God  so  came  to  us.  It  contented  not  the  divine 
heart  to  tell  us  by  inspired  prophets  of  His  love. 
It  satisfied  Him  not  to  surround  us  with  blessings 
and  gifts.  The  highest  expression  of  love  can  alone 
satisfy  His  love.  He  must  come  and  die  for  us. 
How  this  comes  home  to  us  as  we  think  of  Christ's 
temptations  on  the  cross.  He  hangs  there  through 
all  those  hours  of  excruciating  bodily  pain.  And  this 
is  the  peculiarity  of  His  trial,  that  separates  it  from 
that  of  the  saints  and  martyrs.  At  any  moment,  by 
a  single  wish,  a  single  exertion  of  His  divine  power 
He  could  have  freed  Himself.  Not  only  could  he 
have  come  down  from  the  cross,  but  remaining  there, 
have  dismissed  the  pain.  Try  and  think  of  any 


84          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

severe  pain  you  have  endured,  and  ask  yourself  what 
you  would  have  done  if  by  a  single  act  of  will  you 
could  have  been  free  from  it.  What  was  it  that 
withheld  the  Divine  Sufferer  from  the  exercise  of  His 
power?  It  was  love.  It  was  not  the  nails  that 
held  Him  to  the  cross,  but  love.  His  love  for  men 
and  their  salvation  was  greater  than  the  pain.  It  was 
divine  love,  love  for  sinners,  love  for  the  guilty,  love 
for  the  lost  that  held  Him  there.  It  was  love  for 
you  and  me. 

You  have,  perchance,  sometime  been  in  some  soli- 
tary place  and,  all  alone,  watched  the  coming  day. 
Little  by  little  the  smaller  stars  faded  from  sight, 
night's  shades  began  to  pass,  the  welcome  heralds  of 
the  dawn  began  to  glimmer  in  the  east,  the  broad 
oriflammes  of  the  day  unfolded  in  majestic  beauty, 
the  piercing  sun's  rays  shone  above  the  horizon,  and 
at  last,  gladdening  the  earth  with  its  brightness,  rose 
the  sun  in  its  strength.  As  you  have  watched  the 
transformation  you  could  but  have  felt  that  if  indeed 
you  were  all  alone,  and  the  only  human  being  upon 
the  planet,  all  the  grand  machinery  of  stars  and  sun 
and  revolving  earth  must  go  on,  that  little  you  might 
live. 

So  sometimes  as  you  recall,  and  recall  it  well  you 
may  on  your  knees,  earth's  greatest  tragedy,  and 
look  up  at  the  Divine  Sufferer,  crucified  for  love,  you 
may  come  to  know  the  truth,  that  if  you  were  the 
only  human  being  in  existence,  the  only  living  sinner, 
just  as  truly  as  that  sun  must  rise  if  you  are  to  live, 
so  must  Christ  the  Lord  come  and  suffer  and  die, 
that  you  may  be  saved.  Out  of  Christ's  temptations 


CHRIST'S  TEMPTATION  85 

consummated  on  the  cross  we  need  to  gain  this  truth 
and  make  it  a  home  truth.  "  He  loved  me,  and  gave 
Himself  for  me."  Then  as  true  love  always  must 
make  its  response,  and  as  far  as  it  can  a  like  return, 
our  response  will  be  self-surrender  to  His  love.  It 
must  be  love  for  love  and  life  for  life.  As  Thou  gav- 
est  Thyself,  Blessed  Lord,  to  me,  so,  poor  and  weak 
and  imperfect  as  I  am,  I  give  myself  to  Thee, 

"  Just  as  I  am,  though  tossed  about 
With  many  a  conflict,  many  a  doubt, 
Fightings  and  fears  within,  without, 
O  Lamb  of  God,  I  come.  " 


CHAPTER    VI 

ETERNAL   LIFE 

CREATION  is  an  expression  of  the  thoughts  of 
God.  Its  progressive  character  shows  it  moves 
to  an  end.  United  to  God  by  His  power  through 
His  immanence,  it  progresses  to  a  farther  union,  by 
union  with  Him  in  Jesus  Christ.  For  He,  uniting 
the  human  and  divine  natures,  joins  together  thereby 
the  created  and  uncreated.  This  is  the  greatest, 
grandest  work  of  God.  It  is  the  consummation  of 
creation.  Whether  we  agree  or  not  with  some  modern 
scientific  thought,  that  this  planet  occupies  a  central 
position  and  is  alone  inhabited  with  beings  like  our- 
selves, by  God's  entering  into  it  by  way  of  the  Incar- 
nation He  makes  it  a  centre  for  spiritual  influence 
throughout  the  universe.  The  answer,  then,  to  the 
objection,  why  should  God  have  come  into  so  little  a 
planet,  is,  God  comes  into  the  universe  and  on  its 
behalf,  and  our  planet  is  the  point  of  His  entrance. 
For  He  came  that  according  to  His  purpose  "  He 
might  gather  together  in  one  all  things  in  Christ  both 
which  are  in  heaven  and  which  are  on  earth." 

As  Christians,  we  may  hold  that  this  was  from 
the  first  God's  original  plan.  He  designed  to  enter 
creation  and  become  incarnate,  and  so  unite  it  to 
Himself.  The  other,  an  also  allowable  view,  is  that 
He  came  in  consequence  of  man's  fall.  But  this  is 


ETERNAL   LIFE  87 

to  make  God's  greatest,  grandest  work  dependent  on 
His  creatures'  sin.  We  believe,  on  the  other  hand, 
that  God  always  intended  to  come,  and  man's  sin  did 
not  baffle  God's  purpose.  He  came,  indeed,  differ- 
ently from  what  He  would  have  done,  and  the  remedy 
of  sin  brought  out  the  greatest  expression  of  His  love. 
But  as  Maurice  has  said,  "The  fall  did  not  frustrate 
the  scheme  of  God.  It  is  wrong  to  speak  as  if  He 
devised  a  scheme  as  a  remedy  for  the  consequences 
of  the  fall.  Christ  was  before  all  things,  and  by  Him 
all  things  consist.  In  Him  He  created  man,  and  His 
incarnation,  though  it  came  later  than  the  fall,  was 
really  in  God's  purpose  before  it." 

Christ  came  to  unite  creation  to  God  by  a  new  tie, 
by  uniting  man  to  God  in  Himself,  and,  since  man 
was  alienated  from  God  by  sin  and  his  nature  marred, 
to  reconcile  him  to  God  and  restore  his  nature.  It 
was  by  the  Cross  this  work  was  to  be  effected.  A 
late  French  critic  maintains  that  Christ  did  not  expect 
to  die.  He  considered  Himself  safe  at  the  Passover 
feast,  because  the  rulers  would  not  dare  then  to  arrest 
Him.  He  intended  at  its  close  to  go  immediately 
into  Galilee  where  He  could  meet  His  disciples. 
Judas,  learning  of  this  project,  forced  the  hand  of  the 
high  priests  to  arrest  Christ  during  the  feast  or  else 
He  would  escape  them.  This  precipitated  the  tragedy. 
But  Christ  had  not  intended  to  die,  and  it  was  the 
peculiar  genius  of  S.  Paul,  rilled  with  his  Jewish  ideas 
of  sacrifice,  that  originated  the  idea  of  a  redemption 
through  Christ's  death. 

But  this  theory  breaks  down  before  two  facts. 
The  prophets  had  foretold  the  suffering  death  of 


88  CHRISTIAN  AND   CATHOLIC 

the  Messiah.  They  had  pictured  almost  every  inci- 
dent of  it  and  had  assigned  to  it  a  redemptive  value. 
"  He  was  wounded  for  our  transgressions,  He  was 
bruised  for  our  iniquities :  the  chastisement  of  our 
peace  was  upon  Him ;  and  with  His  stripes  we  are 
healed.  All  we  like  sheep  have  gone  astray;  and 
the  Lord  hath  laid  on  Him  the  iniquity  of  us  all." 
The  other  fact  is  that  Christ  foretold  His  crucifixion 
long  before  it  occurred.  "  If  I  be  lifted  up,  I  will 
draw  all  men  unto  me."  He  taught  the  disciples 
that  the  Son  of  Man  would  be  "  delivered  into  the 
hands  of  men,  and  they  shall  kill  Him." *  He  earnestly 
desired  it.  He  said,  "  I  have  a  baptism  to  be  bap- 
tized with  and  how  am  I  straitened  till  it  is  accom- 
plished." He  asked  S.  John  and  S.  James,  who 
sought  to  sit  on  His  right  hand  and  left,  whether 
they  could  be  baptized  with  the  baptism  He  was 
baptized  with?  He  clearly  declared  to  them  the  re- 
demptive character  of  His  death.  The  Son  of  Man 
came  "  to  minister  and  to  give  His  life  a  ransom  for 
many."  No  question  can  be  raised  here  concerning 
the  word  Christ  uses.  He  came  to  be  a  "  ransom." 

So  likewise  at  the  institution  of  the  Last  Supper, 
He  said,  "  Take  ye,  this  is  my  body."  "  This  is  my 
blood  of  the  new  covenant  which  is  poured  out  for 
many."  We  cite  from  S.  Mark's  Gospel  where  we 
have  the  shortest  form  of  the  institution.  But  it  is 
sufficient  for  our  purpose  and  the  others  agree  with  it. 
Our  Lord  is  contrasting  His  blood  with  the  blood  of 
the  victims  under  the  old  covenant.  He  implies 
thereby  that  He  also  is  a  victim  and  His  blood  is 

*  S.  Mark  ix.  31. 


ETERNAL  LIFE  89 

shed  in  sacrifice.  As  the  blood  of  the  old  sacrifice, 
sprinkled  upon  the  people,  established  them  in  a  cov- 
enanted relation  with  God,  so  His  blood  would  be  shed 
for  the  benefit  of  many.  As  S.  Matthew  records  it, 
"This  is  my  blood  of  the  new  covenant  which  is 
shed  for  many  for  the  remission  of  sins."  J  Christ 
came  therefore  to  die,  not  as  a  martyr,  or  to  give  an 
inspiring  example  of  stoic  endurance,  or  to  deliver  us 
mortals  from  the  fear  of  death,  but  "  to  give  Himself 
a  ransom,"  2  "  being  made  sin,"  3  *.  e.,  the  sin-victim, 
for  us,  that  we  might  have  "  redemption  through  His 
blood,  even  the  forgiveness  of  sins."  4 

Without  attempting,  what  is  beyond  us,  an  exhaus- 
tive theological  analysis  of  Christ's  ransom  work  on 
Calvary,  yet  we  may  be  helped  to  a  practical  consid- 
eration of  this  mystery,  by  noticing  the  threefold 
effects  of  sin  which  were  by  the  cross  removed. 

First,  sin  separates  man  from  God.  Secondly,  man 
becomes  the  servant  of  him  whom  he  obeys.  Thirdly, 
by  sin  man  mars  his  own  nature.  It  was  to  rectify 
these  three  evils  that  Christ  endured  the  cross. 


The  whole  work  of  man's  redemption  has  its  source 
in  the  love  of  the  ever  Blessed  Trinity.  It  was  a  con- 
ception of  Milton,  erroneous  as  audacious,  that  im- 
agined a  divergence  between  the  Father  and  the  Son. 
God  the  Father,  God  the  Son,  God  the  Holy  Ghost 
loved  the  creature  He  had  made  and  came  to  rescue 
him  from  his  evil  and  turn  the  evil  into  good. 

1  S.  Matt.  xxvi.  28.  »  2  Cor.  v.  21. 

2  S.  Matt.  xx.  28.  «  I  Col.  i.  14. 


90  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

Another  truth  helps  us.  God  deals  with  us  as  in- 
dividuals, but  also  in  our  collective  capacity.  He 
deals  with  us  as  families,  as  nations,  and  as  a  race. 
There  is  great  love  and  wisdom  in  God's  doing  this. 
As  a  race,  we  are  possessed  of  a  common  human 
nature.  In  this  we  are  unlike  the  angels.  They  are 
created  by  God's  fiat,  in  all  their  beauty,  one  by  one. 
God  created  human  nature  differently.  He  created  a 
nature  and  gave  to  it  a  law  by  which  it  extends  itself. 
All  individuals  share  in  that  human  nature  and  are 
members  of  it.  It  accounts  for  that  sympathy  which 
like  a  hidden  force  binds  humanity  together.  Now  this 
nature  abused  its  glorious  prerogative,  and,  becoming 
disobedient,  separated  itself  from  the  grace  of  God. 

How  was  it  to  be  restored  to  God's  favor?  Did 
God's  anger  need  to  be  appeased?  God,  we  venture 
to  think,  needed  nothing  done  to  make  Him  love  His 
child.  He  had  made  him.  He  knew  the  temptations 
to  which  he  would  be  exposed.  He  knew  whereof 
we  were  made,  He  remembered  we  were  but  dust. 
His  child's  misery  only  called  into  exercise  the  love 
of  His  mercy.  Sin  or  lawlessness  is  repellant  to 
His  nature.  But  He  loved  His  child,  perhaps  like 
some  earthly  father,  all  the  more  for  the  wrong  he 
did  to  himself  by  his  fall. 

But  if  God  loved  His  creature,  did  not  His  justice 
or  righteousness  require  that  some  penalty  should  be 
undergone  on  the  part  of  man,  or  his  representative, 
before  a  reconciliation  should  take  place?  This  has 
been  pressed  in  modern  times  by  some,  to  the  extent 
of  a  mercantile  theory.  According  to  it,  for  every 
transgression,  satisfaction  must  be  made  by  a  deter- 


ETERNAL  LIFE  91 

mined  amount  of  pain.  We  need  not  say  we  do  not 
hold  this  theory.  But  in  one  sense  (there  may  be 
others),  we  can  see  why  the  justice  and  righteousness 
of  God  demanded  that  a  reparation  should  be  made. 
God,  with  an  infinite  love,  loved  His  child,  grieved 
over  his  childlike  folly  and  sins  and  falls  and  wicked- 
ness. In  spite  of  all  his  errors  God's  great  heart 
loved  him  beyond  what  earthly  love  can  compass  or 
express.  But  while  His  child  remained  in  a  rebellious 
attitude,  God  could  not  for  His  child's  sake,  or  in 
justice  to  Himself,  treat  him  as  He  otherwise  would. 
The  rebellion  of  the  child  hindered  the  free  action  of 
God's  love  to  him.  For  sin  had  created  a  barrier 
between  man  and  God.  It  was  this  barrier  Christ  did 
away.  Having  taken  upon  Himself  our  human  nature, 
He  became  its  representative.  And  acting  for  the 
race,  He  became  its  representative  penitent.  Be- 
neath the  olive  trees  He  wept,  on  the  cross  He 
endured  sin's  penalty.  He  culminated  a  life-long 
obedience  by  an  obedience  unto  death.  It  was  a 
great  price  to  pay,  but  so  He  paid  it.  Human  nature, 
on  the  cross,  turned  in  obedient  love  to  God.  The 
handwriting  that  was  against  us  was  done  away. 
The  restraint  upon  the  action  of  God's  love  was 
removed.  God  and  man  were  reconciled. 

II 

Again,  man  by  his  lawlessness  brings  himself  under 
the  control  of  sin.  Sin  winds  its  cords  about  him 
by  ever-tightening  habits.  They  seem  at  first  light 
as  gossamer,  but  become  as  steel.  The  flippant, 
cynical  reason  holds  in  prison  the  spiritual  nature. 


92  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

The  proud,  rebellious  will  easily  rules  the  unbeliev- 
ing heart.  Unseen,  yet  not  without  power,  stand 
close  to  us  evil  spirits  who  tempt  us,  as  well  as 
angels  who  guard.  He  who  knew,  as  we  do  not, 
the  unseen  world,  has  revealed  to  us  Satan's  malefic 
power.  Serving  evil  spirits,  men  have  so  far  come 
under  their  control  as  to  be  in  a  degree  possessed  by 
them.  Sin,  too,  brings  its  own  punishment.  Sin, 
when  it  is  finished,  bringeth  forth  death.  Christ,  for 
those  who  are  united  to  Him,  changes  death  into  a 
gate  of  life.  For  others  it  is  only  a  prelude  to  that 
separation  from  God  which  is  death  eternal. 

Now  Christ  by  His  cross  delivered  us  from  our 
foes  —  sin,  Satan,  and  death.  The  cross  rises 
between  earth  and  heaven,  for  by  it  God  and  man 
are  reconciled.  It  stretches  laterally,  and  on  its 
transverse  beam  the  blessed  hands  were  nailed. 
The  cross  was  not  only  Christ's  altar  whereon  He 
as  our  high  priest  pleaded  for  our  ransom ;  it  was  also 
a  throne  from  which  as  the  king  He  exercised  His 
sovereign  power  of  forgiveness,  His  pulpit  from 
which  He  preached.  It  was  a  battle-field  where  He 
fought  with  Satan,  and  all  the  powers  of  darkness, 
and  with  death,  and  conquered.  He  delivered  human 
nature  from  the  dominion  of  their  powers.  Death 
had  no  dominion  over  Him  nor  those  members  who 
are  His.  He  delivered  us  from  these  our  foes  at  a 
great  cost.  As  soldiers  are  said  to  have  redeemed 
their  country,  taking  it  out  of  the  enemy's  hand  at 
the  cost  of  their  lives,  so  Christ,  our  Redeemer, 
redeemed  us,  and  paid  this  great  ransom.  By  Christ 
man  was  set  free,  in  Him  men  may  be  freed. 


ETERNAL  LIFE  93 

III 

The  third  thing  Christ  did  by  the  cross  was  to 
restore  and  elevate  man's  nature. 

And  here  we  may  notice  the  significant  fact  that 
there  are  two  distinct  sheddings  of  the  precious 
blood.  It  flows  down  from  His  bleeding  head,  His 
blessed  hands  and  pierced  feet.  Through  His  long 
agony  it  flowed  from  the  wounds  of  His  holy  body. 
But  when  this  was  over,  and  the  "  It  is  finished  "  was 
said,  there  came  another  outpouring  from  His 
pierced  side.  The  soldier's  lance  that  pierced  to 
the  heart  and  caused  the  water  and  the  blood  to 
flow  added  nothing  save  an  indignity  to  Christ's 
work  of  redemption.  That  work  was  over  with  the 
dismissal  of  His  Spirit  into  His  Father's  hands,  the 
offering  unto  death  was  then  made.  The  merits, 
infinite  by  reason  of  the  infinite  dignity  of  His  per- 
son, were  all  accumulated.  Why  then  did  the  divine 
economy  provide  for  this  second  and  independent 
blood-shedding?  Because  human  nature  had  not 
only  to  be  reconciled  and  redeemed,  but  restored. 

Man  needed  four  great  aids  to  achieve  his  proper 
greatness.  He  needed  greater  light  concerning  him- 
self and  destiny  than  nature  alone  could  give.  But 
if  this  was  his  only  need,  God  could  have  satisfied  it 
by  sending  angels  who  week  by  week  might  teach 
us  our  duty  and  our  destiny.  But  man  wants  some- 
thing more  than  light.  Angels  might  bring  it  to  us. 
But  moral  truth  in  abstract  form  would  little  profit 
us.  Angels  with  more  than  human  eloquence  might 
present  it  to  us,  but  we  should  reply,  you  have  not  a 


94  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

nature  like  our  own  and  you  cannot  understand  us. 
What  man  cries  out  for,  is  truth  and  life  embodied  in 
an  example.  It  must  be  in  a  form  that  we  can  see. 
It  is  one  who  goes  before  us,  that  says,  step  where  I 
step,  take  my  hand,  lean  on  my  arm. 

This  is  what  we  know  Christ  came  to  do.  He  is 
our  great  exemplar.  But  if  this  was  all  we  needed, 
why  should  He  not  have  come  as  the  first  Adam  is 
believed  to  have  come?  Why  did  He  not  take  on 
Himself  the  nature  of  man,  formed  from  the  dust,  or 
in  some  other  way?  Why  did  He  humble  Himself 
to  be  born  of  a  virgin?  Why  did  He  not  appear,  as 
we  find  Him  in  His  public  life,  and  so  set  us  an 
example  of  the  ideal  man?  If  we  only  needed  a 
great  exemplar  He  might  have  done  so.  But  what 
we  also  needed  was  to  be  delivered  from  the  pangs 
of  conscience,  the  burden  of  sin,  and  to  be  reconciled 
to  God.  Man  had  sinned  and  needed  forgiveness. 
And  so,  that  He  might  deliver  the  race,  God  entered 
into  the  race.  He  made  Himself  one  with  it.  He 
took  our  nature  on  Him  in  the  womb  of  the  Blessed 
Virgin.  He  did  not  become  like  one  of  us,  but  one 
of  us.  And  so,  as  our  representative,  effected  the 
At-one-ment  for  the  race  and  opened  the  way  for 
man's  pardon. 

But  if  the  work  stopped  with  our  reconciliation  and 
pardon,  why,  when  our  Lord  had  effected  it,  did  He 
not  lay  aside  the  nature  He  had  assumed?  Why 
should  He  not  only  rise  from  the  tomb  with  it,  but  carry 
it  into  heaven?  Why  wear  it  now  and  for  all  eternity? 
Yet  this  is  a  fundamental  Christian  truth.  The  rea- 
son is,  because  man  needs  not  only  acceptance  and 


ETERNAL   LIFE  95 

pardon,  but  restoration.  "  No  remission  of  penalty," 
said  S.  Athanasius,  "  or  equivalent  compensation,  no 
fiat  of  God's  will  would  have  sufficed ;  there  was 
needed  a  change  in  man  himself."  "  It  is  not  only 
the  penalty  for  sin,  but  sin  itself,  from  which  man 
must  be  freed.  The  condition  of  deadness  within 
him  must  be  quickened  into  life." 

Of  the  forgiveness  of  sin  and  deliverance  from  its 
effects  nature  knows  nothing.  "  Each  of  us,"  said 
Bishop  Alexander,  of  Derry,  "  is  set  down  in  the 
perilous  game  of  life  to  contend  with  a  player  who  is 
perfectly  fair  but  absolutely  remorseless.  Play  but 
one  pawn  ill,  and  you  must  abide  the  consequences. 
You  cannot  take  back  a  single  move.  You  have  to 
do  with  the  passionless  majesty  of  an  order  that  can 
never  be  broken,  with  the  pitiless  sequence  of  an 
unforgiving  necessity.  You  are  in  the  grasp  of  a 
tyrant  who  says 

"  Fool  !    All  that  is  at  all 
Lasts  ever.     Past  recall." 

But  what  nature  cannot  do,  Christ  can. 

As  symbolizing  this  and  proclaiming  the  means, 
Christ's  side  is  opened  and  the  water  and  the  blood 
stream  out.  This  mystery  of  the  precious  blood 
declares  to  us  that  as  Eve  was  formed  out  of  the  side 
of  Adam,  so  the  Church,  the  second  Eve,  should  be 
formed  from  out  the  side  of  the  second  Adam,  the 
head  of  the  new  race.  We  can  thus  better  under- 
stand the  text,  "  As  in  Adam  all  die,  even  so  in  Christ 
shall  all  be  made  alive."  We  do  not  die  in  Adam 
by  believing  in  him,  or  by  any  mental  connection 
with  him.  We  die  in  Adam  because  we  are  connected 


96  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

with  him  by  an  actual  and  real  contact  of  natures, 
through  descent.  Even  so  in  Christ  we  are  to  be 
made  alive;  not  by  any  act  of  faith  or  trust  or 
repentance  merely,  but  by  union  of  our  natures  with 
His.  And  the  only  way  ordained  by  which  this  can 
be  secured  is  by  the  sacraments.  For  human  nature 
needed  not  only  light,  an  exemplar,  pardon,  but 
healing  of  its  wounds,  restoration,  the  invigoration  by 
a  new,  divinely  given  energy.  So  the  water  and  the 
blood  are  extended  to  us  through  the  divinely  ordered 
channels  of  grace.  We  are  by  them  incorporated 
into  Christ,  are  inoculated  with  His  life,  made  par- 
takers of  His  victory  over  sin  and  death,  are  crucified 
to  self  and  the  world  through  union  with  His  crucifix- 
ion, are  buried  and  risen  with  Him  in  newness  of  life, 
and  so  pass  through  the  living  Door  and  Way,  which 
is  Himself,  to  a  joyful  resurrection. 

And  here  we  may  answer  some  questions  we  have 
often  heard. 

If  it  is  true  that  we  are  restored,  not  merely  by 
acts  of  faith  but  by  an  incorporation  into  the  trium- 
phant nature  of  Christ,  how  are  the  heathen  and  the 
faithful  Jews  who  lived  before  Christ  to  be  saved? 
Concerning  the  faithful  dead  who  lived  before  Christ, 
we  know  they  did  not  go  to  heaven.  One  very  satis- 
factory reason  is  that  for  man  heaven  did  not  exist 
Heaven  is  not  only  a  place  but  a  state  in  which  man 
enjoys  the  beatific  vision  of  God.  The  human 
nature  of  Christ  was  the  first  that  possessed  this  vision 
and  it  is  as  members  of  Christ  and  in  Him  that  we 
shall.  The  fathers  of  the  Old  Testament  were  in  a 
state  of  waiting  and  preparation.  When  our  Lord 


ETERNAL   LIFE  97 

descended  into  Hades,  He  preached  to  them.  He 
delivered  to  them  by  word  the  same  graces  He  gives 
us,  who  are  in  the  flesh,  through  the  sacraments. 
They  had  been  justified  by  faith.  They  were  just 
men,  justified  by  faith.  But  when  Christ  communi- 
cated to  them  the  grace  of  His  humanity,  they  became 
"  the  spirits  of  just  men  made  perfect."  Thus  our 
Lord  provided  for  all  the  elect  who  had  preceded 
Him.  The  heathen,  we  are  told,  are  a  law  unto  them- 
selves. But  as  the  only  way  to  eternal  life  is  in  and 
through  Christ,  we  may  believe,  as  He  provided  for 
the  faithful  Jews  in  that  waiting  world  of  "  many 
stations,"  so  in  some  way  He  may  reach  them. 

But  then  it  is  sometimes  asked,  why  should  God 
have  required  all  this  process  of  Redemption :  His 
incarnation,  redemption,  suffering,  machinery  of 
Church  and  sacraments?  Why  should  not  the 
Almighty  Father  by  a  word  of  His  power  have 
restored  man  and  removed  all  evils  from  him?  Grant- 
ing that  He  could  have  done  so,  a  difficulty  would 
yet  remain.  You  complain  that  the  scheme  of 
redemption  does  not  look  simple.  You  look  at  it 
askance  as  being  theological.  Although  there  is 
nothing  very  simple  in  this  world,  yet  you  want  a 
very  simple  solution  of  a  matter  the  most  intricate  and 
mysterious.  Why,  you  ask,  should  not  God  have 
determined  the  whole  matter  by  a  word  of  forgiveness 
and  restoration?  But  this  difficulty  would  remain. 
"  How  many  times  would  you  ask  Him  to  go  on 
doing  so?  No  forgiveness  nor  restoration  by  an 
external  word  of  power  would  secure  man  in  a  sinless 
condition.  As  S.  Athanasius  said,  man  would  then 

7 


98  CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

be  worse  off  than  he  was  in  his  original  state  because 
he  would  have  learned  to  sin.  Moreover,  if  restored 
in  such  wise  he  would  be  more  likely,  restoration 
being  found  so  easy,  to  sin  again.  So  God  would 
have  to  go  on  eternally,  and  man  would  not  be  deliv- 
ered from  the  power  of  sin,  and  evil  would  continue 
in  God's  universe. 

And  this  brings  us  to  the  final  cause  of  the 
Redeemer's  work.  He  sought  not  only  to  provide  a 
way  for  man's  forgiveness,  deliverance,  and  restoration, 
but  to  drive  out  sin  and  all  evils  from  His  universe. 
He  would  complete  creation,  by  so  establishing  it 
that  righteousness  should  reign  forever. 

If  God's  purposes  are  tending  to  so  glorious  a  con- 
summation our  hearts  should  be  filled  with  hope  and 
joy.  Men,  straining  their  eyes  into  the  future, 
prophesy  great  things  for  their  country  or  for  the 
race.  But  "  civilization  is  a  self-limited  elevator  of 
men."  It  rests  on  the  law  of  inequality  in  men's 
mental  equipment  and  an  unequal  distribution  of 
wealth.  It  brings  temptation  as  well  as  amelioration. 
It  has  no  specific  remedy  for  the  source  of  all  evil, 
sin.  We  know,  too,  how  earthly  kingdoms  rise  and 
fall,  and  how  the  planet  itself  must  run  its  course  and 
die.  But  the  end  of  creation,  revealed  by  Christ, 
gives  us  the  vision  of  a  permanent  kingdom  that  can 
never  dissolve  and  of  a  glory  that  will  never  pass 
away.  It  secures  forever  the  happiness  of  man  and 
reveals  a  purpose  and  an  end  of  creation  worthy  of 
God. 

Do  we  in  childish  wonder  ask,  why  did  not  God 
begin  by  so  making  the  universe?  One  reason  is 


ETERNAL  LIFE  99 

because,  in  His  great  love,  He  desires  us  to  work  with 
Him  in  the  making  of  it.  This  is  the  greatest  privi- 
lege of  man  that  he  is  allowed  to  be  a  co-worker  with 
God.  If,  for  a  short  time  and  in  a  preparatory  stage, 
God  allows  sin  and  evil,  it  is  that  we,  by  a  victory 
over  temptation,  may  be  fitted  for  that  further  state. 
God  indeed  might  have  so  created  us  that,  like  the 
plants  and  trees,  we  should  have  mechanically  obeyed 
His  laws.  But  He  has  shown  His  omnipotence  not 
merely  in  making  things,  but  in  so  making,  that  with 
a  free-will  endowment  His  intelligent  creatures  might, 
with  His  aid,  rising  to  a  higher  degree  of  union  with 
God,  make  themselves. 

But  how  is  it  that  this  condition  of  life  and  being  is 
to  be  eternally  secured  ? 

To  understand  this  we  must  know  that  there  are 
three  degrees  of  union  with  God.  First,  man  is  united 
to  God  by  His  power.  We  live  and  move  and  have 
our  being  in  Him.  Next,  as  Christians  we  are  united 
to  Christ,  the  God-Man,  by  grace.  We  are  in  Him 
and  He  in  us.  Then  there  remains  a  third  union 
which  is  to  come.  Union  with  God  in  glory.  In 
Christ  we  may  attain  to  the  beatific  vision  and  be 
upheld,  in  a  new  way,  in  union  with  God's  holiness 
and  bliss. 

This  final  union  with  God  is  called  the  gift  of  eter- 
nal life.  "The  gift  of  God  is  eternal  life  in  Jesus 
Christ  our  Lord."  It  is  a  gift,  an  added  blessing,  not 
something  that  inherently  belongs  to  our  nature.  It 
is  different  from  immortality.  Immortality  belongs  to 
us  by  the  terms  of  our  nature.  The  greatest  of  earth's 
philosophic  thinkers  have  believed  this.  What  is  so 


ioo         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

universal  a  desire  in  man's  nature  must  have  its  satis- 
faction. But  there  is  a  vast  difference  between  natural 
immortality  and  the  gift  of  eternal  life.  Immortality 
only  assures  us  a  future,  it  says  nothing  more.  It  tells 
us  nothing  of  the  character  of  that  future.  It  secures 
us  nothing  in  it.  We  merely  know  that  we  shall  here- 
after exist. 

If,  believing  that  we  shall  pass  finally  into  some  fair 
heaven,  pray  ask  yourself  the  question,  what  is  to 
secure  your  state  or  residence  there?  The  angels 
fell  from  heaven.  Adam  sinned  in  Paradise.  You 
may  be  sheltered  there  from  many  temptations,  but 
you  will  have  yourself  still  to  contend  with.  One  sin 
lost  the  angels  their  heavenly  estate.  One  sin  for- 
feited for  Adam  Paradise.  Any  one  spiritual  sin 
would  shut  out  the  brightness  and  joy  of  heaven  from 
the  soul.  It  would  fall  like  Lucifer.  If  then  we  are 
merely  elevated  to  a  condition  or  place  where  our 
position  is  only  secure  on  our  perfect  obedience,  is 
this  immortality  to  be  desired?  Is  the  warfare  never 
to  cease?  Is  the  struggle  with  self  and  temptation 
never  to  be  over?  If  this  is  so,  take  back,  Mr.  Phil- 
osopher, your  arguments  about  immortality.  Under 
this  agonizing  condition  we  don't  want  it.  A  heaven 
in  which  we  are  not  eternally  secure  is  not  desirable 
and  is  no  fitting  climax  to  a  divine  creation. 

The  gift  of  eternal  life  makes  our  condition  secure. 
We  enter  into  it,  by  a  union  by  grace  with  Christ  here 
and  attain  in  Him  to  a  union  with  God  in  glory. 

It  is  this  final  union  with  God  that  secures  our 
eternal  happiness.  For  our  real  and  true  happiness 
depends  on  our  sinlessness.  God  is  omnipotent,  but 


ETERNAL   LIFE  101 

some  things  He  cannot  do.  He  cannot  break  His  own 
laws  or  violate  His  own  nature.  He  cannot  make 
two  and  two  five  or  make  it  right  to  tell  a  lie.  And 
He  can  only  permanently  secure  men  from  falling 
into  sin  but  by  uniting  them  in  Christ  to  Himself  in 
glory.  So  the  blessed  souls  who  attain  that  state 
may  look  down  the  opening  avenues  of  eternity,  and 
know  with  absolute  certainty  that  nothing  can  sepa- 
rate them  from  the  love  and  holiness  of  God,  and 
that  in  Him  their  estate  is  eternally  secured. 

But  it  may  be  asked,  what  of  those  who  do  not 
attain  this  condition?  What  can  we  say  but  what 
Christ  has  said  ?  There  will  come  a  time,  how  soon 
we  know  not,  when  the  drama  of  creation  will  come 
to  its  last  act ;  when  creation  shall  be  perfected  and 
shine  with  radiant  beauty,  and  God  shall  be  all  in  all ; 
when  those  who  are  eventually  in  Christ  will  rise  up 
into  that  final  union  with  God  in  everlasting  bliss ; 
when,  sad  as  it  is  to  say  it,  there  will  be  those  who 
miss  their  proffered  end,  and  who  will  be  lost. 

But  will  not  good  eventually  triumph  over  evil? 
Shall  there  not  come  a  time  when  truth  and  righteous- 
ness shall  triumph?  Shall  not  God  at  last  conquer 
and  banish  all  lawlessness  and  sin?  Surely  this  con- 
flict is  not  to  go  on  forever?  The  good  must  win, 
sin  must  disappear. 

Very  true,  when  the  kingdom  of  glory  begins  sin 
will  cease.  God's  ideal  creation  will  be  complete. 
But  how  is  it  that  sin  will  cease  ?  In  this  wise :  Those 
who  are  gathered  into  the  Divine  Life  and  Light  will 
not  sin,  for  they  will  be  upheld  in  holiness  by  that 
special  union  with  God.  Those  who  are  left  without 


102         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

will  sin  no  more ;  for,  all  grace  being  withdrawn,  they 
will  not  be  able  to  act  against  it.  They  are  in  this 
unhappy  condition.  They  cannot  separate  them- 
selves from  the  power  of  God,  for  that  were  to  annihi- 
late themselves,  and  to  annihilate  is  an  act  of  Deity  as 
great  as  to  create.  They  cannot  thus  separate  them- 
selves from  God  and  destroy  themselves,  but  they 
have  separated  themselves  from  the  grace  of  God 
and  so  ruined  themselves.  They  continue  in  existence, 
but  their  spiritual  life  is  gone.  They  are  in  the  dark- 
ness, not  in  the  light. 

But  should  they  ever  repent  could  not  God  receive 
them? 

A  superficial  view  might  lead  us  to  think  this  possi- 
ble, but  there  are  difficulties  in  accepting  it.  The 
idea  seems  based  on  the  theory  that  whenever  man 
repents  God  is  bound  to  forgive  him.  Now  God 
has  provided  a  way  by  which  man  can  escape  from 
the  evils  he  has  brought  on  himself;  if  man  does  not 
accept  it,  is  God  bound  to  do  any  more?  If  man 
may  go  on,  not  only  in  this  world  but  indefinitely  for 
ages  in  the  next,  defying  God,  and  God  is  bound, 
whenever  man  chooses  to  repent,  to  forgive  him,  we 
have  the  spectacle  of  God  dethroned,  for  God  has 
not  conquered  man,  but  man  has  conquered  God. 

Another  difficulty  is,  that  those  in  this  condition 
will  feel  no  desire  to  repent.  As  they  cannot  sin  be- 
cause they  have  no  spiritual  life  nor  grace  to  sin 
against,  so  also  they  cannot  repent,  for  they  have  no 
grace  to  repent  with.  One  can  no  more  repent  with- 
out grace  than  an  animal  can  breathe  in  an  exhausted 
receiver. 


ETERNAL  LIFE  103 

What  we  must  realize  is  that  creation  is  a  majesti- 
cally progressive  work.  It  proceeds  under  the  im- 
pulse of  the  Eternal  Infinite  Energy  from  stage  to 
stage.  When  one  period,  with  its  own  productive- 
ness and  work  is  past,  another  succeeds.  There  is 
no  return;  the  door  is  shut.  We  see  this  written 
everywhere  in  the  great  parable  of  nature.  Take  the 
monkeys  whose  antics  amuse  us  as  children,  but 
whose  strangely  human  faces  repel  us  in  later  years. 
As  some  biologists  have  said,  we  are  descended  or 
developed  from  the  same  primordial  germs.  Only 
there  were  some  germs  that  corresponded  to  their 
environment  in  one  way  and  became  humans,  and  the 
others  corresponded  differently  and  became  monkeys. 
If  the  latter  had  at  an  earlier  stage  taken  another 
direction  they  would  have  developed  to  the  higher 
range  of  life.  But  they  failed.  They  missed  it.  It 
became  lost  to  them.  It  is  a  permanent  loss.  They 
are  forever  condemned  to  be  monkeys.  So  it  will  be 
for  those  men  who  will  not  correspond  to  their 
Christian  environment.  They  will  miss  their  end,  for- 
feit what  they  might  have  been,  and  be  lost 

But  we  say,  if  a  man  is  a  good  moral  man,  a  good 
citizen,  good  to  his  neighbors,  public  spirited,  why 
should  he  be  lost?  The  reason  is  because  he  was  so 
self-willed  and  self-opinionated  that  he  would  not  use 
the  means  to  be  saved.  Eternal  life  is  not  immor- 
tality. It  is  a  gift  of  God  in  Jesus  Christ.  It  is, 
being  a  gift,  something  added  to  nature.  It  is  thus 
a  supernatural  end  offered  to  man.  And  a  super- 
natural end  cannot  be  attained  by  natural  goodness 
or  means.  It  can  only  be  gained  in  Christ.  There 


104         CHRISTIAN   AND    CATHOLIC 

is  no  other   name   given  under   heaven  whereby  we 
may  be  saved. 

Unwilling  to  accept  Christ's  terms,  men  wrap  them- 
selves in  the  delusion  that  they  are  as  good  as  most, 
and  that  God  must  be  a  merciful  God,  and  it  is  incon- 
ceivable He  would  let  any  suffer  an  eternal  loss. 

True,  most  true  is  it,  that  God  is  goodness  and 
love  itself.  Most  true  is  it  that  He  is  a  merciful 
God.  He  is  so  merciful  that  He  sent  His  only-be- 
gotten Son  to  suffer  and  die  for  us.  Every  drop  of 
blood  that  was  shed,  every  agony  He  endured,  tells  of 
His  exceeding  mercy  and  His  love. 

If  tempted  to  reject  His  invitation,  not  to  use  the 
means  of  union  with  Him,  kneel  down,  and  ask  your- 
self these  questions:  What  could  God  have  done 
more  than  He  has  to  show  His  love  towards  us? 
How  could  His  mercy  have  made  the  terms  of  salva- 
tion easier  than  they  are?  If  I  reject  His  mercy  ex- 
tended now,  how  can  I  before  His  judgment  seat 
claim  a  mercy  I  have  refused  and  rejected?  If 
obstinately  acting  on  my  own  theories  and  opinions 
I  remain  unmoved  by  love's  entreaty  and  am  lost,  as 
I  shall  be,  whose  fault  will  it  be?  Say  it  over  again 
and  again  to  thyself,  self-slain  soul,  Whose  fault  will 
it  be? 

"  As  froth  on  the  face  of  the  deep, 

As  foam  on  the  crest  of  the  sea, 
As  dreams  at  the  waking  of  sleep, 
As  gourd  of  a  day  and  a  night, 
As  harvest  that  no  man  shall  reap, 

As  vintage  that  never  shall  be, 
Is  hope  if  it  cling  not  aright, 
O  Lord  Christ,  unto  Thee." 


CHAPTER   VII 
LOVE  AND  SERVICE 

GOD  is  Love.  It  is  the  essence  of  His  nature. 
He  is  the  eternal  Fountain  from  which  it 
flows.  It  flows  out  to  us  through  the  channel  of 
Christ's  humanity.  It  enters  into  us  by  the  com- 
munication of  His  Holy  Spirit.  He  quickens  and 
develops  our  responsive  love.  With  the  love  thus 
given,  we  love  Him  who  is  love.  With  every  fresh 
inflowing  of  love  we  are  united  by  love  to  Him  and 
love  Him  more. 

Thus  we  have  three  manifestations  of  love,  Love's 
welcome,  its  progress,  its  response. 


LOVE'S   WELCOME 

The  soul  that  has  turned  to  God  has  been  wel- 
comed by  Him.  No  words  can  tell  the  joy  of  the 
Ever  Blessed  One  as  He  takes  His  child,  by  baptism 
or  absolution,  into  His  embrace.  For  this  He  made 
him,  for  this  redeemed  him,  for  this  bought  him  at 
His  passion's  cost.  For  this  He  besieged  him  with 
His  providences,  for  this  sent  after  him  the  arrows 
of  His  love,  and.  at  last  the  dear  work  was  accom- 
plished and  His  child  was  won ;  won  from  out  sin's 
enticements,  and  Satan's  rule ;  won  from  death's  dark 


106         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

misery  and  hell's  abode;  won  from  the  tyranny  of 
self,  its  pride  and  obstinacy  and  self-deceit.  Every 
so  welcomed  soul  cherishes  as  an  eternal  treasure  the 
remembrance  of  God's  unselfish  love. 

For  what  are  we  that  He  should  so  love  us?  We 
need  not  contrast  ourselves  with  the  angels,  nor  with 
so  many  of  His  servants.  We  have  not  the  intellect 
of  great  doctors  like  a  S.  Augustine  or  a  S.  Thomas, 
not  the  practical  skill  of  a  Vincent,  nor  the  devotion 
of  the  martyr,  nor  the  heroism  of  the  religious.  We 
are  not  upon  any  reasonable  ground  needful  to  Him. 
His  work  would  go  on  successfully  without  us. 
Neither  are  we  so  very  estimable  that  Christ  should 
desire  us.  In  every  spiritual  grace  thousands  sur- 
pass us.  When  we  look  at  ourselves,  what  do  we 
see?  What  weak  sides,  what  defects,  what  faults. 
Our  companions  and  friends,  kindly,  perhaps,  but 
critically,  recognize  our  failings.  Their  sharp  eyes 
have  seen  through  all  the  barriers  our  conventual 
life  has  thrown  about  us.  Our  enemies  are  keener 
still.  The  soul,  too,  knows  its  own  hidden  faults.  It 
remembers  how  it  has  failed  under  some  trial  or 
temptation.  There  has  come  possibly  to  it,  by  some 
shock  or  divine  enlightenment,  a  great  revelation  of 
itself;  its  weakness,  sloth,  gluttony,  or  other  fleshly 
sins;  its  self-interest,  self-seeking,  self-deceit,  insta- 
bility, ambition,  spiritual  pride;  its  snobby  worldli- 
ness,  veneered  piety,  moral  cowardice,  praise-seeking, 
uncharitable  gossiping,  spiritual  coxcombry  and  pre- 
tence. Is  there,  then,  anything  about  us  to  appear 
comely  in  God's  sight?  Have  you  never  felt  what  a 
poor  character,  after  all,  you  are?  How  little,  too,  you 


LOVE  AND   SERVICE  107 

have  accomplished  for  good?  Have  you  never  felt 
disappointed  with  yourself?  Have  you  not  seen  the 
same  old  faults  returning  to  assault  and  baffle  you? 
Possibly  you  have  become  weary  at  times  with  the 
perplexing  struggle,  then  thought  that  if  persons 
knew  you  as  you  know  yourself  they  would  not  esteem 
you.  Thought  there  was  no  use  of  trying  any  more. 
"  For  our  life  seemed  but  as  an  arrow  flying  in  the 
dark,  aimless  and  unprofitable." 

Now  the  answer  to  all  this  is,  our  Lord  knows  us. 
He  knows  all  our  faults  of  mind  and  heart,  all  our 
secret  and  open  sins,  all  our  murmurings,  our  weak- 
ness, our  spiritual  decadence.  He  sees  how  full  we 
are  of  self  and  self-love,  knows  the  whole  coast  of 
our  discontent,  not  a  single  declension  escapes  His 
scrutiny,  and  He  beholds  our  soul's  weakness  and 
its  hideousness,  too.  To  the  divine  righteousness  it  is 
a  clotted  mass  of  corruption.  Yet  —  He  loves  us; 
loves  us  with  the  persevering  energy  of  His  divine 
nature ;  loves  us  with  a  love  that  only  His  passion 
can  express. 

Well  may  we  say,  how  unselfish  is  His  love.  We 
are  like  lepers  at  His  gate.  But  when  we  were  sinners 
Christ  died  for  us.  None,  therefore,  need  to  sit  down 
in  brooding  despondency  over  the  past.  God  does 
not  despair  of  you,  you  must  never  despair  of  your- 
self. He  who  knows  thee  loves  thee.  You  can 
trust  that  love.  He  knows  thy  weakness  but  He 
knows  His  strength.  He  who  healed  the  lepers,  and 
cast  out  devils,  and  raised  the  dead,  and  can  blot  out 
the  past,  can  recreate  thee  in  Himself.  However 
long  since  our  first  conversion  it  may  have  been,  yet 


io8         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

the  Christian  soul  ever  confesses  His  love  to  have 
been  long-suffering.  He  has  forgiven  when  He  might 
have  condemned.  The  fatal  shears  have  not  parted 
the  narrow  thread  of  life.  We  have  been  unfaithful 
to  Him  and  He  has  not  put  us  away.  In  spite  of  all 
our  neglectfulness,  ingratitude,  waywardness,  our  luke- 
warmness,  slothfulness,  if  not  actual  rebellion,  the 
patience  of  divine  love  has  waited  for  us.  It  has 
stood  without  our  heart's  door  listening  for  our 
slightest  response.  Yet  how  dull  of  hearing  have 
we  been,  how  slow  has  been  our  progress.  How 
heedless  of  calls  and  warnings  and  promptings  to  the 
higher  path.  How  easily  contented  with  a  low  attain- 
ment. At  times  how  presumptuous  and  again  how 
careless  of  grace.  If  a  servant  had  treated  the  orna- 
ments in  our  drawing-rooms  as  we  have  the  precious 
jewels  committed  to  our  care,  the  punishment  of 
discharge  would  have  been  speedily  given. 

While,  then,  bearing  with  us  He  has  also  been 
most  true.  Working  for  our  good  He  has  sent  checks 
and  disappointments  and  afflictions.  Love  sent  them 
all.  It  was  all  for  one  end.  There  is  only  one  safe 
resting-place  for  the  heart  of  man  and  that  is  the  will 
of  God.  Thither  would  He  woo  us,  thither  constrain 
us.  Ofttimes  He  withdraws  His  spiritual  favors,  that, 
like  the  bride  in  the  canticles,  we  may  arise  and  with 
self-abandonment  seek  Him.  If  the  soul  feels  it 
must  have  exhausted,  by  its  failures,  every  claim  on 
His  mercy,  feels  it  has  so  broken  every  promise  as 
to  have  no  reliance  on  itself,  still  He  does  not  aban- 
don us.  When  the  sky  was  dark,  without  a  ray  of 
hope,  when  we  were  in  despair  because  we  could  not 


LOVE  AND   SERVICE  109 

break  sin's  chains,  when  we  have  been  as  one  ready 
to  perish,  He  has  stretched  out  His  hand  to  save. 
He  would  not  let  us  sink  beneath  the  dark  waters. 
When  all  seemed  lost  He  has  delivered  us  from  the 
lion's  mouth.  When  the  avenger's  hot  breath  had 
overtaken  us,  He  has  opened  His  arms  as  our  city 
of  refuge.  When  bringing  nothing  back  to  our 
Father's  house  but  the  soiled  and  tattered  garment 
of  our  sins,  He  has  sent  us  the  kiss  of  peace. 

"  The  world's  crowns  and  songs  are  for  success.  His 
divine  generosity  gives  them  to  the  beaten,  with  the 
dust  of  flight  upon  their  clothes  and  the  flush  of 
shame  upon  their  brow.  He  tells  them  His  gentlest 
tales,  and  sings  them  His  sweetest  songs,  and  opens 
to  them  His  greenest  meadows,  and  arches  over  them 
His  bluest  sky.  And  why?  That  they  may  be  sure 
that  the  Shepherd  can  find  His  sheep,  and  the  woman 
her  drachma;  sure  that  the  sighing  of  their  shame 
may  be  lost,  like  one  discordant  ripple  in  the  great 
deep  swelling  of  the  angels'  songs." 

II 

LOVE'S   PROGRESS 

Our  Christian  life  has  been  compared  to  a  journey 
divided  into  three  sections,  called  the  purificative, 
illuminative,  and  unitive  ways.  The  illustration  has 
its  defects.  The  spiritual  work  belonging  to  each 
condition  may  be  simultaneously  present.  Nor  do 
we  regularly  proceed  from  one  degree  to  another, 
leaving  the  former  behind.  Our  progress  is  rather 
like  a  spiral  one  which  while  reverting,  relatively,  to 


no         CHRISTIAN  AND   CATHOLIC 

a  former  position  yet  continually  ascends.  Thus  in 
every  new  level  reached  we  find  an  occurrence  of 
these  threefold  features. 

The  purification  comes  first,  but  the  soul  finds 
every  advance  is  preceded  by  a  fresh  purificative 
action.  We  never  can  lay  it  aside.  The  tree  as  it 
the  higher  ascends  strikes  its  roots  wider  and  deeper 
in  the  soil.  Unto  life's  end  the  soul  must  ever  be 
accompanied  by  four  faithful  knights.  So  first,  abid- 
ing Sorrow,  in  his  brown  garb  of  penitence,  with  a 
scourge  for  his  weapon,  rides  by  our  side.  The 
good  God  has  in  His  covenanted  mercy  accepted  this 
pilgrim's  soul.  Its  soul  may  have  been  as  scarlet, 
but  now  is  whiter  than  snow.  The  great  joy  of  ac- 
ceptance is  ever  singing  Te  Deums  in  his  heart.  The 
more  he  comes  to  know  of  God's  paternal  pathetic 
love,  the  more  he  loves,  the  more  he  sorrows;  yet 
the  more  he  sorrows,  the  more  he  loves.  His  soul 
reaching  heavenward  is  covered  like  the  mountain 
tops  whose  snow-clad  summits  burn  at  morn  and  at 
eve  with  hidden  glory  fires,  but  ever  flowing  down 
the  sides  are  the  rivulets  of  penitence  that  keep  the 
humble  valleys  green. 

Beside  him  also  ride  two  other  trusty  knights, 
Hate  and  Fear. 

Hate  is  love  with  its  vizor  down  and  its  lance  at 
rest.  Hate  is  a  most  potential  guardsman  and  a 
great  gift  of  God.  It  is  a  gift  bestowed  out  of  the 
treasury  of  His  own  divine  nature.  God  hates  sin. 
The  wrath  of  the  Lamb  is  beyond  the  terrible,  it  is  a 
consuming  fire.  It  is  equal  and  commensurate  with 
God's  unmeasurable  love.  It  is  the  love  of  the  holy 


LOVE   AND   SERVICE  in 

and  good  and  true  turned  against  the  unholy  and  evil 
and  false.  No  scenes  of  Nature  displaying  in  her 
most  awful  aspects  the  terrifying  results  of  geologic 
catastrophy,  no  appalling  earthquake  or  whirlwind  of 
deathly  sulphuric  flames  from  belching  volcanic  moun- 
tain can  adequately  give  an  idea  of  the  wrath  of  God. 
Doubtless,  He  has  so  ordered  Nature  that  as  she  ex- 
presses, when  earth  is  clothed  in  summer  beauty  and 
the  lake  reflects  the  heavens  in  silvered  cadence,  His 
beauty  and  His  love,  so  she  declares  in  her  gigantic  up- 
heavals —  volcanic  eruptions  and  whirlwind  and  storm, 
—  His  Holy  Wrath.  The  pilgrim  needs  to  gather 
the  forces  of  his  soul  together  that  with  a  condensed 
energy  he  may  hate  sin.  He  needs  by  constant  acts 
of  will  to  develop  this  power.  He  must  cultivate  an 
aversion  and  hatred  to  all  that  tends  to  it.  He  must 
practise  it  diligently  as  men  with  care  and  time  prac- 
tise at  rifle-shooting.  It  must  become  a  cherished  and 
vigorously  energetic  principle  of  action.  He  must 
constantly  take  the  little  sins  and  dash  them  against 
the  rock.  He  will  pray  that  God  give  him  of  His  own 
wrath,  so  that  with  the  wrath  of  God  he  will  loathe, 
detest,  and  hate  whatever  leads  from  duty  and  from 
God. 

Beside  the  pilgrim  also  as  a  loyal  helper  rides  Holy 
Fear.  There  is  a  carnal  fear,  a  physical  fear,  a  human 
fear,  which  seems  akin.  But  this  fear  is  Holy  Fear. 
It,  too,  is  a  gift  of  God.  Its  characteristic  is  its  wis- 
dom. It  is  far-sighted.  It  looks  ahead.  It  forecasts 
trials  and  temptations.  It  is  keen  in  seeing  through 
disguises.  It  reads  men  through  their  masks.  It 
quickly  discerns  the  subtleties  of  Satan.  It  gives  the 


ii2         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

soul  a  quick  alarm  at  his  approach.  It  exposes  to 
the  soul  its  spiritual  idleness,  the  sin  that  hides  itself 
under  its  murmurings,  despondencies,  low  spirits,  com- 
plainings, criticisms  of  others.  It  bids  it  beware  of 
the  self-righteousness  that  rests  in  self  or  anything 
save  Christ.  It  is  a  most  watchful,  keen-eyed  knight, 
and  rides  with  dart  or  arrow  in  its  hand. 

And,  not  in  front,  but  modestly  behind,  comes 
Fortitude.  For  Christian  Fortitude  is  not  the  earth- 
born  virtue  painters  have  loved  to  portray,  refulgent 
in  shining  armor,  with  tower-like  shield  and  lion- 
like  helmet,  giving  challenge  with  drawn  sword  to 
all  comers.  There  is  no  boasting  about  her.  S. 
Paul,  who  well  might  boast,  does  not  say  I  have 
fought  a  good  fight,  but  the  good  fight.  Christian 
Fortitude  is  a  Joan  of  Arc  virtue,  she  rides  in  armor 
clad,  a  woman  still.  She  it  is  who  stands  by  the 
cross  when  the  disciples  all  have  fled.  She  shrinks 
not  from  self-sacrifice,  endures  the  weariness  of  the 
way,  waits  patiently  on  God's  slowness.  Fortitude  is 
full  of  hope  and  trust.  She  knows  God  sits  above  the 
water  flood,  and  the  final  victory  is  secure.  She  has 
no  trust  in  earthly  means  nor  weapons ;  puts  not  her 
trust  in  princes.  Her  motto  is,  "  Let  come  what  will 
come,  Thy  will  is  well-come."  Defeat  by  the  world 
is  the  way  the  world  defeats  itself.  Her  weapon,  un- 
like the  others,  is  not  seen.  It  is  hid  in  her  heart. 
It  is  the  weapon  of  Faith.  This  is  the  victory  that 
overcometh  the  world.  With  these  four  surrounding, 
protecting  aids,  the  soul  makes  progress  in  the  puri- 
ficative  way. 

But  the  child  of  God  desires  not  only  to  be  free 


LOVE  AND   SERVICE  113 

from  evil,  but  to  be  Christ-like.  Along  with  all  that 
belongs  to  the  stage  of  purification  he  would  enter 
the  illuminative  way.  He  would  follow  Christ's  ex- 
ample and  in  Him  become  a  new  creature,  trans- 
formed after  His  likeness. 

It  helps  us  to  understand  this  process  by  remember- 
ing the  triple  character  of  our  nature.  Man,  so 
Scripture  describes  him,  is  a  triple  unit.  He  consists, 
as  S.  Paul  asserts,  of  body,  soul,  and  spirit.  In 
each  of  these  portions  of  our  being  there  is  a 
tendency  to  predominance ;  the  body  seeks  ofttimes  to 
rule  over  the  soul,  the  soul  over  the  spirit.  In  each 
of  the  three  departments  of  our  nature  there  is  thus 
a  possibility  and  tendency  to  disorder  or  sin.  In 
the  body  it  is  called  sensuality,  in  the  soul  covetous- 
ness,  in  the  spirit,  pride.  From  these  three  roots  of 
sin  or  lawlessness  all  sin  proceeds.  These  separate 
seeds  of  evil  are  called  in  Holy  Scripture  "  the  lust 
of  the  flesh,  the  lust  of  the  eye,  and  the  pride  of 
life."  The  fitness  of  the  first  definition  declares  it- 
self. The  second  applies  to  the  soul.  As  the  soul 
looks  out  on  the  world  through  its  window,  the  eye, 
it  inordinately  desires  the  possession  of  what  it  sees. 
This  sin  of  covetousness  is  designated  as  the  "  lust  of 
the  eye."  As  the  spirit  of  man  rises  up  in  proud 
rebellion  against  God,  its  sin  is  declared  to  be  the 
"pride  of  life." 

While  there  are,  then,  three  root  sins  in  us,  there 
are  three  attractive  external  forces  which  incite  and 
develop  them.  These  are  the  three  powers  we  re- 
nounce at  our  baptism,  —  the  flesh,  the  world,  and 
the  devil.  The  flesh  excites  our  carnal  appetites,  the 


114         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

world  displays  its  enticing  attractions,  Satan  seeks  to 
make  us  disobedient  by  appeals  to  our  independ- 
ence and  pride.  But  over  and  against  these  three 
enemies  there  are  three  powerful  antagonistic  forces, 
—  our  Lord's  humanity,  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  the 
Holy  Spirit.  In  union  with  our  Lord's  humanity  we 
find  the  victory  over  our  flesh.  The  kingdom  of 
heaven  reveals  to  us  the  lasting  riches.  In  union 
with  the  Holy  Spirit  man's  spirit  rises  into  the  Di- 
vine Sonship.  He  becomes  a  son  of  God  in  Christ. 

In  this  illuminative  way  Christ  becomes  the  model 
of  our  new  life.  He  is  no  mere  historical  figure. 
By  His  grace  He  repeats  His  miracles  of  mercy  in  us. 
He  opens  our  eyes,  and  the  verities  of  the  faith  are 
seen  in  their  correlated  beauty.  He  unstops  our  ears, 
and  what  was  before  distasteful  becomes  a  treasured 
message  to  our  hearts.  He  loosens  our  tongues  that 
we  be  not  ashamed  to  confess  Him  before  men.  He 
calms  the  fever  of  passion,  heals  the  swellings  of 
pride,  cures  our  leprosy,  casts  out  the  evil  spirits  from 
our  hearts.  He  takes  us  into  His  company  and,  as 
we  follow  Him,  love  makes  us  graciously  like  that 
we  love. 

But  ever  and  along  with  this  advancement  the  soul 
begins  to  enter  into  the  unitive  way.  We  may  have  to 
wait  till  besetting  sins  are  mastered  and  Christian 
principles  have  become  dominant.  We  may  have  to 
endure  the  hardness  of  the  wilderness  before  we  come 
to  the  Holy  Land.  But  Beulah  does  not  lie  only  at 
the  end  of  the  Christian  pilgrimage.  God  gives  His 
children  from  the  first,  in  increasing  degrees,  peace 
and  joy  in  believing.  In  proportion  as  self  dies, 


LOVE  AND   SERVICE  115 

Christ  reigns  within  us.  The  establishment  of  His 
reign  is  a  slow  and  progressive  work.  Human  nature 
is  wont  to  hurry,  God's  works  are  ordinarily  slow. 
But  sometimes,  by  special  gift  to  souls  needing  pecu- 
liar help,  more  often  by  patient  progress,  the  Christian 
soul  becomes  conscious  of  its  union  with  God.  It 
ceases  to  struggle  and  labor  in  the  same  way  it  did 
before.  It  enters  more  into  a  passive  and  receptive 
state.  It  becomes  more  attentive  to  God's  working 
than  its  own.  It  meditates  less,  contemplates  more. 
It  finds  a  mystical  truth  in  the  saying,  "  Blessed  are 
the  dead  that  die  in  the  Lord."  It  finds  that  we  may 
pass  even  here  to  a  joyful  spiritual  resurrection.  It 
is  "  no  longer  I,  but  Christ  that  liveth  in  me." 

As  this  union  is  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  it  will 
be  helpful  to  note  His  progressive  action  towards 
mankind.  His  great  characteristic  is  the  desire  for 
union.  He  it  is  who  binds  together  in  oneness  the 
Blessed  Trinity.  Respecting  creation  He  is  repre- 
sented as  brooding  over  and  longing  to  enter  into  it. 
He  feels  its  alienation  from  God  and  with  tenderest 
love  strives  with  man.  But  at  first  He  operates  upon 
mankind  from  without.  His  sunshine  falls  upon  man- 
kind, but  is  not  a  light  within  them.  He  cannot 
enter  in  and  abide  with  a  defiled  and  sinful  nature. 
Like  the  dove  He  may  traverse  humanity  but  can 
find  no  place  of  rest.  He  can  indeed  bestow  gifts  on 
individuals.  Gifts  of  cunning  workmanship  and  skill 
for  the  adornment  of  the  Tabernacle.  He  may  in- 
spire seers  and  prophets.  Holy  men  of  old  moved 
by  Him  may  write  the  sacred  scriptures.  But  within 
man,  as  creation's  point  of  contact  with  Himself,  He 


ii6         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

cannot  enter.  At  last,  however,  His  divine  longing 
is  satisfied.  God  becomes  incarnate.  Then  in  that 
sinless  humanity  the  Holy  Spirit  can  find  a  home. 
With  this  advancement  of  creation  towards  its  des- 
tined perfection,  the  Being  of  God  is  filled  with  joy. 
Now  at  last  the  Holy  Spirit  can  enter  into  creation 
and  begin  a  new  union  of  it  with  God.  And  the 
Spirit  was  given  without  measure  unto  Christ.  The 
Holy  Dove  finds  at  last  its  resting-place.  The 
humanity  of  Christ  received  it,  the  divinity  of  Christ 
enabled  Him  to  sustain  this  transcendent  gift. 

And  what  was  this  to  us? 

Consider  how  the  Holy  Spirit  dwelt  in  Christ.  He 
was  with  Him  in  all  the  stages  of  His  life,  from  the 
time  He  lay  enfolded  as  an  infant  in  His  Blessed 
Mother's  arms,  through  all  the  labors  of  His  public 
life  and  the  dark  hours  of  His  agony  and  passion,  to 
His  resurrection  and  ascension.  Christ  was  led  by 
the  Spirit.  He  said  nothing,  did  nothing,  but  as  His 
humanity  was  prompted  and  guided  by  the  Holy 
Ghost.  How  wonderfully  close  and  intimate  was  that 
connection.  He  refers  to  it  when  He  says,  "Of 
myself  I  can  do  nothing,"  "As  I  hear  so  I  speak." 
The  Holy  Spirit  never  leaves  Him.  When  at  last 
His  humanity  is  elevated  to  the  right  hand  of  power, 
He  baptizes  His  waiting  Church  with  the  Holy 
Ghost. 

It  is  a  popular  error  to  suppose  He  sends  the 
Comforter  as  if  the  Blessed  Spirit  was  external  to 
Himself.  The  fundamental  truth  of  the  pentecostal 
mystery  is  that  the  Holy  Spirit,  having  dwelt  in  the 
humanity  of  Christ,  is  sent  by  Christ  from  Himself 


LOVE  AND   SERVICE  117 

to  us.  Without  leaving  that  most  dear  dwelling-place 
He  flows  from  Christ  into  His  mystical  body.  The 
Holy  Spirit  thus  enters  into  the  Church.  It  was  a 
unique  and  exceptional  act.  He  descended  never  to 
ascend.  He  came  to  abide  in  the  Church  forever. 
There  can  no  more  be  a  repetition  of  Pentecost  than 
of  the  Nativity  of  Christ.  Entering  into  the  embryo 
Church  He  quickened  it  into  life,  made  it  effective  in 
all  its  ministrations,  and  united  it  and  its  members  to 
Christ 

We  have  thus  the  foundation  of  the  unitive  way. 
Often  the  Christian  soul  may  have  wished  a  like  priv- 
ilege with  the  Apostles  and  holy  women,  of  seeing 
Christ  in  the  flesh,  of  waiting  on  Him,  of  kneeling  at 
His  feet.  It  may  sometimes  have  longed  to  converse 
with  one  of  His  disciples  or  Apostles  and  inquire  of 
them  concerning  His  acts,  His  doctrine.  It  may 
have  desired  to  visit  the  Holy  Land  and  see  the  very 
places  where  He  taught  and  died.  But  we  have  a 
better  guide  than  the  Apostles  with  their  limited 
knowledge  before  Pentecost  could  possibly  be  to  us. 
They  up  to  that  time  were  but  imperfectly  enlightened. 
The  first  three  historical  Gospels  reveal  only  the  state 
of  their  pupilage.  We  can  never  get  at  Christ  by 
getting  back  to  the  state  they  were  in.  But  what  the 
collective  Church  and  we,  as  its  members,  now  pos- 
sess, is  not  the  mere  record  of  what  Christ  said  and 
did,  but  a  witness  who  dwelt  within  Him.  He  spoke 
no  parable,  wrought  no  miracle,  delivered  no  dis- 
course, but  as  moved  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  All  His 
emotions,  fears,  hopes,  sorrows,  joys  were  Spirit- 
guided  and  controlled.  The  Holy  Spirit  was  with 


ii8         CHRISTIAN  AND   CATHOLIC 

Him  as  He  lay  in  Mary's  arms  and  as  He  hung  upon 
the  cross.  It  is  this  same  Spirit  who  abides  in  the 
Church  and  in  us.  He  not  only  reveals  Christ  to  us, 
but  unites  us  to  Him.  Moreover,  He  transmits 
Christ's  virtues  to  us  and  makes  us  the  extensions  of 
His  own  perfections. 

This  is  the  strength  and  joy  of  the  unitive  way. 
Herein  does  the  Church  differ  from  sectarianism. 
The  latter  points  to  Christ,  bids  us  come  to  Christ,  to 
believe  in  Christ,  trust  ourselves  to  Christ,  follow 
Christ's  example.  But  the  Church  more  fully  helps 
us  by  giving  us  the  Holy  Spirit  in  confirmation, 
and  by  her  sacramental  system  unites  us  to  Christ. 
Travellers  abroad  have  often  seen  in  great  picture  gal- 
leries of  Europe  industrious  and  skilful  copyists,  re- 
producing with  more  or  less  art  the  famous  works  of 
great  masters.  To  whatever  degree  of  perfection, 
after  life-long  efforts,  they  may  have  attained,  the 
connoisseur  knows  their  work  is  but  a  copy.  In  some 
way  the  genius  and  inspiration,  the  imperceptible 
touches  of  the  original  are  wanting.  So  it  is  with 
those  who  apart  from  sacramental  grace  strive  to  im- 
itate Christ.  His  life  is  indeed  inimitable.  But  He 
has  not  asked  us  to  strive  to  copy  it,  as  the  copyist 
of  the  gallery  does  the  great  works  of  art  He  sends 
to  us  His  Holy  Spirit  to  enter  into  us  and  reveal 
His  own  life.  It  is  not  we  who  are  copying  Him,  but 
He  who  is  remoulding  us.  His  meekness  comes  into 
us  to  make  us  meek,  His  patience  to  make  us  patient, 
His  fortitude  to  make  us  enduring,  His  zeal  to  make 
us  diligent,  His  unselfishness  to  make  us  care  for 
others,  His  temperance  to  make  us  temperate  in  all 


LOVE  AND   SERVICE  119 

things,  His  prayerfulness  to  make  us  continuous  in 
prayer,  His  love  to  make  us  loving. 

The  soul  learns  to  rest  entirely  on  Him,  on  His 
merits  and  in  His  love.  We  come  to  the  Great  Peace. 
The  wings  of  the  dove  carry  us  thither.  Earthly 
sorrow  and  trial  may  come,  but  they  only  come 
freighted  with  love.  By  great  bodily  or  spiritual  af- 
flictions Christ  opens  to  some  the  inner  doors  of  His 
passion.  The  unknown  depths  of  divine  love  re- 
veal their  awful  and  entrancing  loveliness.  If  He 
gives  them  to  drink  out  of  His  own  cup  of  sorrow, 
He  holds  it  to  their  lips.  Dying  in  Christ  they  live, 
receiving  a  death  wound  in  their  souls.  They  live 
not  so  much  as  He  now  lives  in  them.  Though  on 
their  cross,  in  the  darkness,  suffering  or  deserted, 
misunderstood  or  betrayed,  alone  in  their  enforced 
solitude,  or  struggling  with  life's  great  burdens,  yet 
His  peace  takes  possession  of  them.  They  cling  not 
to  Him  so  much  as  He  enfolds  them  in  Himself.  His 
love  so  triumphantly  asserts  itself  that  they  love  all, 
forgive  all,  bear  with  all  for  His  sake.  They  only 
rejoice  and  thank  Him  as  every  trial  or  distress  makes 
more  real  His  peace  within.  They  trust  themselves 
wholly  to  Him,  rely  solely  on  His  merits,  rest  in  His 
love.  Trusting  wholly  to  His  precious  blood  they 
desire  for  His  sake  a  cleansing  from  all  stains.  They 
pray  thus  that  they  may  be  less  unworthy  of  His  dear 
love.  But  disquietude  and  uneasiness  about  self 
they  know  not,  for  they  are  in  Him  and  He  in  them. 
There  is  but  one  will  and  heart  between  them  and 
that  is  His.  They  became  as  little  children  to  enter 
into  the  kingdom,  and  now  they  are  as  babes  at  the 


120          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

Divine  Breast.  Their  love  is  a  matured  love  that 
shares  His  counsels,  for  it  knows  His  love.  Their 
will  sleeps,  but  the  heart  awaketh.  The  will  reposes 
in  sweet  content  in  His  Will,  and  the  heart  increasingly 
loves  the  love  that  loves  it.  Thither  to  this  unitive 
embrace  the  Divine  Master,  by  secret  inspirations, 
allures  devout  and  courageous  souls. 

"  Resting  on  the  faithfulness  of  Christ  our  Lord  ; 
Resting  on  the  fulness  of  His  own  sure  Word ; 
Resting  on  His  power,  on  His  love  untold  ; 
Resting  on  His  covenant  secured  of  old. 

"  Resting  in  the  pastures,  and  beneath  the  Rock  ; 
Resting  by  the  waters  where  He  leads  His  flock ; 
Resting  while  we  listen,  at  His  glorious  Feet ; 
Resting  in  His  very  Arms  ;  O  rest  complete." 


Ill 

LOVE'S   RESPONSE 

If  we  are  His  what  shall  we  do  for  Him? 

"  The  world  is  very  evil, 
The  times  are  waxing  late." 

It  is  our  blest  privilege  to  live  somewhere  in  the  later 
days.  The  secret  of  history  lies  not  in  the  progress 
of  the  race,  but  in  the  contest  between  the  good  and 
the  evil,  the  Church  and  the  world.  As  the  bride  of 
Christ,  the  Church  must  in  her  history  repeat  the  life 
of  her  Spouse.  Like  Him  she  was  born,  where  the 
first  Eucharist  was  celebrated,  in  her  Bethlehem  or 
house  of  bread.  She  then  entered  into  her  hidden 
life,  as  Christ  did  His.  She  was  hidden  from  the 


LOVE  AND   SERVICE  121 

great  world,  in  the  Jewish  Church  and  in  the  Gentile 
world.  She  lay  hidden  among  the  poor  and  lowly, 
and  without  popular  recognition,  as  Christ  was,  as 
the  Carpenter  at  Nazareth.  As  we  hear  the  cry  of 
the  mothers  at  the  slaughter  of  their  little  ones,  so  in 
early  centuries  of  the  Church's  hidden  life  we  hear 
of  the  sufferings  of  the  martyrs  in  the  Roman  perse- 
cutions. Then  from  out  that  hidden  life  the  Church 
went  forth  to  her  public  mission.  We  may  not  pause 
on  it.  But  there  comes  a  time  when  the  Church  is 
rent,  the  disciples  are  divided ;  when  Peter  falls  away, 
when  the  sun  and  moon,  which  symbolize  Christ  and 
His  Church,  are  darkened,  when  the  sign  of  the  Son 
of  man,  the  cross  of  persecution  in  many  lands  is 
seen,  when  apostasies  begin  and  men's  hearts  fail  them 
for  fear. 

We  live  in  times  when,  according  to  the  great 
prophecy,  the  Roman  empire  having  passed  away, 
another  beast,  even  modern  civilization,  cometh  up 
out  of  the  earth.  It  has  all  the  power  of  the  first 
beast,  by  its  world-wide  alliances  of  treaty  and  com- 
merce. It,  with  its  pretentious  philanthropy  and 
socialism,  has  horns  like  a  lamb  and  the  deceiving 
subtlety  of  the  speech  of  the  serpent.  It  works,  by 
its  scientific  discoveries,  mighty  miracles  for  man's 
comfort.  It  causes  fire  to  come  down  from  heaven 
and,  utilizing  this  wonder  of  electricity,  transforms 
the  business  of  the  world.  It  deceiveth  them  that 
dwell  on  the  earth  by  means  of  these  miracles,  and  so, 
deserting  the  worship  of  God,  men  worship  the  image 
of  the  beast.  And  all  that  would  succeed  must  bear 
the  mark  of  the  beast  on  their  hand  or  in  their  fore- 


122          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

heads.  They  cannot  buy  or  sell  or  do  anything  suc- 
cessfully unless  they  are  branded  with  the  world's 
mark,  and  think  as  the  world  thinks,  and  do  what  it 
bids  them  do.  The  world  and  the  Church  are  becom- 
ing thus  more  and  more  antagonistic.  According  to 
our  Lord's  foretelling,  the  world  will  finally  treat  the 
Church  as  it  treated  Him.  Unbelief  in  Christ  is  the 
most  fatal  of  all  sins,  and  at  last  the  world  will  reject 
Him.  As  once  it  cried  out  for  Barabbas,  so  it  will 
prefer  a  counterfeit  Christ,  the  product  of  modern 
criticism  and  philanthropy.  It  will  go  on  in  its  op- 
portunism or  delude  itself  with  the  dreams  of  arriving 
at  an  earthly  Utopia.  It  will  not  know  that  as  the 
law  was  given  that,  by  the  impossibility  of  keeping 
it,  man  might  learn  his  own  weakness,  so  by  his  fail- 
ures in  the  way  of  government  he  might  learn  that  all 
government  results  in  failure  that  is  not  under  God. 
The  glorious  vision  of  a  time  of  an  "  all  hail "  here- 
after when  these  mammon  days  are  done,  is  to  find  its 
fulfilment  when  the  king  Himself  shall  appear  on  the 
battle-field.  Then  time  and  its  contests  and  sin  shall 
be  no  more.  Then  those  who  are  His  shall  be  gath- 
ered up  in  the  Eternal  Life,  and  follow  the  Lamb  in 
all  the  further  developments  of  creation,  wheresoever 
He  goeth. 

But  as  there  was  a  special  outpouring  of  divine 
grace  to  welcome  our  Lord's  first  coming,  so  it  will 
be  at  His  second  advent.  We  know  not  how  near 
that  may  be,  but  the  wheels  of  His  chariot  are  speed- 
ing on.  It  is  our  high  privilege  to  be  living  when  the 
contest  thickens.  We  live  in  times  when  if  civilized 
America  and  Europe  are  more  and  more  rejecting 


LOVE  AND   SERVICE  123 

Christ,  heathen  lands  are  being  opened  to  Christian- 
ity. We  are  living  also  in  a  portion  of  the  Catholic 
Church  wherein  a  great  struggle  is  going  on,  between 
those  who  uphold  the  faith  once  delivered  to  the 
saints,  and  those  who  believe  in  a  faith  developed  by 
the  clash  of  modern  opinion.  We  need  not  fear  the 
final  result,  for  we  know  that  when  the  number  re- 
quired for  the  mystical  body  of  Christ  is  completed 
the  Lord  will  appear  and  the  new  era  of  creation's 
progress  be  ushered  in.  But  it  is  ours,  with  enthusi- 
astic patience,  indomitable  faith,  increasing  self-sacri- 
fice, to  hasten  that  His  joy.  The  Anglican  Church 
is  not  to  be  saved  by  the  State,  or  by  compromises  of 
the  faith  with  it.  State  and  Church  are  separating 
everywhere.  The  Church  can  only  recover  her  Cath- 
olic heritage  by  a  revival  of  the  spirit  of  the  martyrs, 
the  confessors,  the  religious.  Christ  and  the  Spirit 
are  working,  the  blessed  angels  are  with  intense 
interest  co-operating,  the  blessed  saints  and  England's 
confessors  are  pleading  for  it.  The  appreciation  of 
it  should  rouse  and  thrill  every  Catholic  heart.  A 
few  thousand  lives  of  men  and  women  consecrated  to 
God  would  ensure  the  Anglican  Church's  defence  of 
it  If  men  by  thousands  are  willing  to  sacrifice  their 
lives  for  their  country,  why  should  there  not  be  the 
like  devotion  to  give  their  lives  for  the  cause  of  Christ 
and  His  kingdom?  What  is  it  holds  souls  back? 
Cannot  you  give  up  the  passing  enjoyment  of  the 
passing  life  for  the  eternal  rewards?  Do  you  sup- 
pose God  can  ask  you  to  give  Him  more  than  He  can 
in  return  give  you?  And  Peter  said,  "  Lord,  if  it  be 
Thou,  bid  me  come  to  Thee  on  the  water."  And  the 


124          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

Divine  Master  said,  "  Come."  Must  we  who  preach 
the  cross,  not  preach  from  the  cross  ?  If  we  cannot 
give  ourselves  shall  we  not  give  of  our  substance,  aid 
by  our  labors,  strengthen  Christ's  work  by  our 
prayers?  In  that  day  when  we  shall  meet  Him  in 
His  glory  shall  we  regret  any  sacrifice  we  have  made? 
Life  is  the  one  opportunity  of  serving  Him,  when 
it  costs  us  something.  Let  us,  churchmen,  rouse  our- 
selves with  the  old  battle-cry  of  the  saints,  "  Our  all 
for  Jesus  and  Jesus  our  all,"  and  take  up  Christ's 
trailing  banner  and  carry  it  on  to  victory ! 


Part  Two 


CATHOLIC 


CHAPTER  VIII 

THE  RULE  OF  FAITH 

THERE  are  not  a  few  believers  in  Christ  who 
are  sincerely  anxious  to  know  what,  as  His 
followers,  they  ought  to  believe  and  do.  Possibly 
they  have  been  for  a  long  time  connected  with  some 
Christian  denomination.  It  has  been  a  help  to  them 
spiritually,  and  many  associations  bind  them  to  it. 
They  have  enjoyed  its  fellowship  and  accepted  its 
teaching.  In  a  charitable  spirit  they  have  looked 
upon  others  differing  from  them  in  belief  or  prac- 
tice as  fellow-Christians.  But  they  have  gotten  ac- 
customed to  their  own  church  ways,  are  known  in  its 
social  circle,  and  are  contented  with  it.  Yet  they  feel 
at  times  that  they  should  be  able  to  give  better  rea- 
sons than  such  as  these  for  remaining  where  they 
are.  Mahometans  in  Europe,  Mormons  in  America 
can  give  the  same.  While  they  hold  their  own  re- 
ligious body  to  be  preferable,  they  charitably  admit 
that  Christians  who  differ  from  them  have  convictions 
as  strong  as  their  own. 

Which  is  right? 

One  way  of  cutting  the  Gordian  knot  is  to  say  that 
one  denomination  is  best  suited  to  one  class  or  tem- 
perament, and  another  to  another.  This  is  the  easy 
solution  that  inertia  in  its  laziness,  not  wanting  to  be 
disturbed,  often  takes.  It  might  help  us  somewhat  if 


128         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

the  denominational  differences  related  chiefly  to  forms 
of  worship.  But  their  divergences  concern  not  cere- 
monial only,  but  involve  doctrine.  The  dogmas  held 
by  one  body  contradict  those  held  by  another.  Here 
one  sect  disbelieves  in  the  deity  of  Christ,  while  others 
worship  Him,  which  is  idolatrous  if  He  is  not  divine. 
Here  the  Catholic  churches  of  the  East  and  West  be- 
lieve in  a  system  of  sacerdotal  and  sacrificial  worship, 
which  Protestants  assert  belong  to  the  old  dispensation 
and  was  by  Christ  entirely  swept  away.  There  are 
some  who  believe  in  the  real  presence  of  Christ  in  the 
Holy  Communion,  and  so  give  Him  honor,  which  to 
others  who  hold  the  service  a  mere  memorial  one  is 
perilously  superstitious  and  wrong. 

We  have  to  admit  that  the  differences  are  of  a 
serious  doctrinal  character. 

Being  thus  aroused,  the  honest  conscience  demands 
some  better  reason  for  our  remaining  where  we  are 
than  just  because  we  are  where  we  are. 

But  grant,  a  reply  comes,  that  if  there  are  doctrinal 
differences,  are  they  essential?  But  if  they  are  not 
essential,  Christians  have  no  right  on  account  of  them 
to  divide  into  separate  organizations.  The  setting 
up  of  pulpit  against  pulpit  and  altar  against  altar 
is  seriously  condemned  in  Holy  Scripture  as  a  sin. 
The  earnest-minded  men  who  have  founded  these 
sects  believed  the  differences  for  which  they  stood 
were  essential.  It  is  obvious  that  they  are,  for  they 
present  contrariant  systems  of  belief  and  practice. 

Others  make  reply  that  the  multiplication  of  sects 
is  not  so  great  an  evil  after  all,  for  it  has  tended  to 
competition.  Surely  it  has,  and  it  has  thereby  placed 


THE   RULE  OF  FAITH  129 

a  severe  tax  on  church  members  to  sustain,  in  our 
smaller  towns,  seven  or  eight  competing  societies. 
It  is  not,  as  in  trade,  where  competition  benefits  the 
public,  by  making  goods  cheaper,  but  this  compe- 
tition makes  religion  dearer.  It  also  hinders  its 
growth,  it  damages  the  goods.  "  Until  you  Chris- 
tians can  agree,  don't  bring  me  your  wares,"  says  the 
unbeliever ;  "  first  unite  among  yourselves,  then  we 
may  listen  to  you." 

What,  then,  shall  we  do?  In  taking  any  important 
journey,  do  you  not  make  inquiries  about  the  various 
routes?  If  going  to  some  distant  country,  do  you 
not  take  into  consideration  not  only  the  comforts 
but  the  dangers  of  the  way?  Do  you  not  seek,  by 
study  and  forethought,  to  provide  against  all  the 
hazards  or  perils  of  the  journey?  Do  you  say  it 
does  not  matter  which  route  or  way,  "  we  are  all 
going  to  the  same  place"?  On  crossing  the  At- 
lantic, would  you  think  it  just  as  well  to  get  into  an 
eighteen-foot  sailboat  as  to  embark  on  a  great  ocean 
steamer?  Do  you  not  prudently  say,  "  I  don't  want 
to  run  any  unnecessary  risk,  I  want  to  go  in  the  safest 
and  best  way?" 

The  earnest  and  prayerful  inquirer  seeking  the 
Christian  truth  thus  often  says,  "  I  wish  I  really  knew 
which  was  right.  I  wish  I  knew  what  Christ  taught 
about  these  things.  I  love  my  own  church,  but  I 
love  Him  more.  If  I  knew  what  He  would  have  me 
do,  I  would  do  it,  no  matter  what  it  might  cost." 
Some  of  the  Apostles  began  their  training  under  S. 
John  the  Baptist,  and  were  devotedly  attached  to 
him,  but  at  the  Master's  call  they  came  out  from 

9 


130         CHRISTIAN  AND   CATHOLIC 

under  that  pupilage  and  followed  Him.  Should  He 
come  to  my  sheepfold  and  call  me,  should  I  not 
obey  His  voice,  go  out  and  follow  Him  wheresoever 
He  leadeth  ?  As  a  Christian  I  do  not  want  merely  to 
please  myself,  but  to  obey  and  please  Him. 

The  question  then  is,  How  shall  a  Christian,  who 
accepts  Christ  as  a  master,  know  what,  as  a  follower 
of  Christ,  he  ought  to  believe  and  do  ? 

There  are  two  axioms,  which  before  attempting  to 
answer,  it  may  be  well  to  state.  They  would  be  ac- 
cepted as  such  by  almost  all  Christians. 

Our  Lord,  we  believe,  was  a  prophet  sent  from  God 
to  teach  men  what  it  is  necessary  for  their  eternal 
welfare  that  they  should  know  and  do.  He  revealed 
an  elevation  of  being  to  which  without  such  guidance 
and  provided  aid  they  could  not  by  themselves  attain. 
It  was  a  matter  of  such  supreme  importance  that  One 
must  come  from  heaven  as  its  revealer  and  guide. 
Its  need  and  transcendent  value  cannot  be  over- 
estimated, for  it  concerns  the  glory  of  God,  the  per- 
fection of  creation,  the  salvation  of  man.  Coming  to 
give  such  a  revelation,  Christ  must  have  left  some 
way  by  which  sincere  inquirers  were  to  learn,  with 
reasonable  certainty,  what  they  ought  to  believe  and 
do.  The  opposite  proposition,  viz.,  that  He  would 
not  have  done  so,  but  have  left  men  to  grope  their 
way  as  best  they  could,  is  not  credible.  He  would 
not  only  be  shown  thereby  to  be  wanting  in  common 
sense,  but  would  forfeit  all  claim  to  be  the  world's 
teacher.  How  could  He  be  the  world's  teacher  with- 
out leaving  some  way  by  which  the  willing  should 
know  what  He  taught  and  what  they  ought  to  do? 


THE   RULE   OF  FAITH  131 

How  could  He  be  a  revealer  of  the  way  to  heaven, 
unless  He  clearly  made  known  and  established  the 
means  of  getting  there? 

The  second  axiom,  which  is  a  corollary  of  the  first, 
is  this :  —  The  way  which  Christ  established  by  which 
His  followers  were  to  learn  what  they  ought  to  be- 
lieve and  do,  must  be  the  best  way,  the  safe  way,  the 
common-sense  way,  in  fact,  the  way  a  Christian  should 
follow. 

Now  we  find  ourselves  surrounded  by  a  babel  of 
conflicting  creeds  and  competing  religions.  But  upon 
analysis  they  may,  for  the  most  part,  be  divided  into 
three  classes,  according  to  their  different  rules  of  faith. 
By  the  "  rule  of  faith  "  is  not  meant  how  a  soul  shall 
be  brought  by  faith  to  Christ,  or  how  by  faith  he  is 
justified.  But  it  here  signifies  the  way  by  which,  as  a 
Christian  or  desiring  to  be  one,  he  is  to  know  what  the 
faith  is.  It  is  his  chart  and  compass,  telling  him  how 
best  to  proceed,  and  learn  what  he  is  to  believe  and 
do.  As  enabling  him  to  achieve  this,  it  is  called  his  rule 
or  measure  of  the  faith.  It  is  his  measure  to  whose 
test  he  brings  every  proposed  doctrine,  and  accepts 
or  rejects  it,  as  it  comes  up  to,  or  falls  short  of  the 
standard.  Now  there  are  three  well-known  rules  or 
measures  of  this  kind  to  be  found  among  Christians. 
However  numerous  their  denominational  divisions 
appear,  they  may,  according  to  their  respective  rules 
be  reduced  to  three  groups.  In  seeking  what  as 
Christians  we  ought  to  know  and  do,  it  becomes  us 
first  to  examine  these  three  rules,  and  see  which  guide 
it  is  best  to  adopt. 

First,  there  is  a  large  number,  embracing  all  the 


132         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

prominent  Protestant  sects,  who  take  as  their  guide 
to  correct  belief,  the  rule,  "  the  Bible  and  the  Bible 
only."  This  is  their  favorite  motto,  and  by  a  famous 
champion,  Mr.  Chillingworth,  was  regarded  as  the 
glory  and  boast  of  Protestantism.  Those  who  take 
this  rule  inculcate  on  us  the  duty  of  patient,  prayer- 
ful study  of  God's  word.  We  are  told  that  if  we  do 
so  go  to  it,  the  Holy  Spirit  will  enlighten  us  and 
guide  us  into  the  truth. 

This  rule  is  defended  by  such  texts  as  these : 
"  Search  the  Scriptures."  The  Jews  were  bidden  by 
our  Lord  to  do  this,  for  He  said  they  testified  of  Him. 
The  Jews  would  be  led  thereby  to  believe  in  Him. 
But  He  does  not  say  this  was  the  way  they  were  to 
learn  what  they  were  to  believe,  after  they  had  done 
so.  The  Bereans,  we  are  told,  were  more  noble  than 
the  Thessalonicans,  because  they  "  searched  the 
Scriptures  daily."  But  this  was  not  the  only  ground 
of  their  commendation;  they  were  more  noble,  be- 
cause from  the  Apostles  "  they  received  the  word 
with  all  readiness  of  mind."  The  Jew  was  told  by 
S.  Peter  that  he  would,  by  the  study  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  be  brought  out  of  Judaism  into  salvation, 
through  faith  in  Jesus  Christ.  The  man  of  God 
could  also  thereby  be  "furnished  unto  all  good  works." 
None  of  these  texts,  however,  state  that,  apart  from 
all  teachers  and  authority,  each  Christian,  by  read- 
ing Holy  Scripture,  is  to  learn  what  is  Christian  doc- 
trine. But,  nevertheless,  most  eloquently  has  the 
Bible  as  the  only  rule  been  defended.  Why,  it  is 
said,  go  back  to  past  times?  Why  seek  light  from 
the  fathers?  Why  perplex  oneself  with  past  contro- 


THE   RULE   OF   FAITH  133 

versies?  The  past  belongs  to  antiquarians  and  book- 
worms. The  learning  it  brings  is  covered  with  the 
dust  of  departed  ages.  We  are  living  in  the  era  of 
discovery  and  light.  Do  you  want  to  know  the  truth, 
let  nothing  come  between  you  and  it.  There  is  the 
Bible.  It  is  God's  word.  An  open  Bible  was  the 
gift  of  the  Reformation  to  the  world.  Go  directly 
to  it.  "  It  will  make  you  wise  unto  salvation." 

While  much  may  be  said  in  behalf  of  this  rule,  the 
question  we  must  ask  ourselves  is  this :  is  it  the  rule 
of  faith  that  Jesus  Christ,  who  established  the  Christian 
religion,  gave  to  us?  Is  it  the  way  He  ordered,  by 
which  we  are  to  know  what  is  the  Christian  religion? 
We  must  all  admit  that  this  is  the  true  test  as  to  its 
correctness  and  value.  For  we  have  agreed  that 
Christ,  being  a  divine  teacher,  must  have  left  one  way 
by  which  honest  inquirers  should  know  what  He 
would  have  them  do  and  believe.  Preachers  may 
wax  eloquent  over  "  the  Bible  and  the  Bible  only  " 
theory,  but  however  attractive,  was  it  the  method 
instituted  by  Christ?  If  it  was,  we  dutifully  accept 
it;  if  not,  we  must  not  take  it  for  our  guide. 

We  can  easily  settle  the  question.  There  is  no 
recorded  command  of  Christ  to  His  Apostles  bidding 
them  write  a  book  and  disseminate  it.  As  a  matter 
of  fact,  the  Christian  Church  was  in  existence  and  in 
active  operation  before  any  of  the  Gospels  were 
written.  The  books  also  of  the  New  Testament  were 
not  collected  and  certified  till  the  close  of  the  second 
century.  Copying  by  hand  was  expensive,  and  so 
comparatively  few  persons  could  possess  a  copy  of 
the  whole  Scripture.  Now  God  could  have  had  the 


134         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

art  of  printing  invented  in  the  first  century  as  well  as 
in  the  fifteenth.  He  could  have  had  the  Bible  put 
into  circulation  when  the  Apostles  went  forth  on  their 
missionary  journeys.  But  here  is  the  plain  fact :  He 
did  not  do  it.  Nor  does  this  theory  meet  the  con- 
dition of  enabling  sincere  persons  with  reasonable 
certainty  to  know  the  faith.  For  in  every  denomina- 
tion there  are  persons  abler  and  more  learned  than 
ourselves,  and  just  as  prayerful  and  sincere,  yet  the 
result  of  the  Protestant  theory  is  a  babel  of  conflict- 
ing and  contradictory  doctrines  on  matters  admitted, 
by  their  divisions  into  sects,  to  be  essential.  The 
rule  of  faith  upon  which  Protestantism  is  based  is 
not  Christ's  rule.  We  ought  not,  therefore,  as  His 
followers,  to  adopt  it. 

Another  rule  of  faith  is  just  the  opposite.  It  is 
the  Roman  rule.  Christianity,  it  is  claimed,  came 
into  the  world,  not  as  a  philosophy  or  proclamation 
of  pardon,  but  as  an  institution.  This  institution  is 
known  by  themselves  as  the  Holy  Roman  Church. 
At  its  head  is  the  pope.  By  God's  endowment  he 
has  an  assisting  official  gift  of  infallibility.  This 
gift  makes  him,  when  he  is  speaking  authorita- 
tively in  the  exercise  of  his  office  as  teacher,  and  as 
is  said  ex  cathedra,  to  the  Church,  on  matters  of  faith 
and  morals,  by  himself  and  apart  from  any  council, 
infallible. 

This  rule  has  to  many  devout  minds  a  great  at- 
traction. Not  merely  because  they  are  Roman 
Catholics  and  are  brought  up  to  surround  with  an 
artificial  halo  the  bishop  of  Rome,  but  to  others 
disturbed  with  the  fruitless  controversies  of  Protes- 


THE   RULE   OF   FAITH  135 

tantism.  What  we  long  for  is  a  voice  that  can  guide 
us.  What  we  desire  is  an  authority  that  we  may  rest 
upon.  What  we  seek  is  relief  from  this  weight  of  per- 
sonal responsibility.  We  cannot  trust  ourselves  to 
the  ever-shifting  uncertainties  of  Protestantism.  Let 
us  hear  the  voice  of  the  Church  speaking  through 
the  holy  father. 

This  rule,  it  is  claimed,  saves  us  from  the  chaos  of 
Protestantism.  It  delivers  us  from  the  anarchy  of 
individualism.  It  replaces  doubt  by  infallible  cer- 
tainty. It,  like  the  other  rule,  has  its  powerful  and 
eloquent  defenders.  The  will  o'  the  wisp  of  private 
opinion,  luring  men  into  pitfalls,  is  contrasted  with 
the  stately  throne  of  the  Vatican  and  the  voice  of 
Peter's  successor. 

But  we  must  hear  what  can  be  said  on  the  other 
side.  It  is  to  be  noted  that  this  assistance  of  infal- 
libility is  not  attached  to  the  holy  see.  The  proof 
of  this  is  that  during  a  papal  vacancy  it  is  held  that 
the  Church  can  make  no  decree.  It  is  thus  seen  to 
be  a  gift  with  which  the  pope  is  personally  invested. 
But  it  is  an  universally  admitted  fact  that  a  number 
of  the  popes  have  been  abnormally  corrupt,  monsters 
in  iniquity.  How  can  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  Truth- 
Guide,  co-operate  with  such  souls?  How  do  it  to 
such  a  degree  of  union  with  Himself  as  to  render 
them  infallible?  Our  minds  may  be,  apart  from  such 
a  special  union,  enlightened  by  prevenient  or  actual 
grace.  But  to  be  infallible  we  must  be  more  than 
gifted  with  light  and  guarded  by  such  grace.  This 
assistance  would  not  secure  infallibility,  for  we  may 
resist  such  aid  and  guidance,  and  so  err.  An  assist- 


136         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

ing  grace  does  secure  infallibility.  To  be  secure 
from  error,  we  must  be  so  united  to  God  (who  is 
truth)  as  to  be  unable,  for  the  purpose  of  being  His 
organ,  of  being  separated  from  Him.  This  is  the 
way  in  which  the  Church  becomes  to  us  an  infallible 
guide.  The  Church  is  infallible  because  the  Holy 
Ghost  dwells  in  it  and  securely  unites  it  to  Christ, 
whose  organ  it  thus  becomes.  How,  then,  can  bad 
popes  with  whom  the  Holy  Spirit  might  plead,  but 
cannot  by  His  indwelling  unite  to  the  truth,  nor  com- 
pel without  the  destruction  of  free  will,  be  the  infal- 
lible organ  of  His  utterance?  Irresistibility  of  divine 
grace  and  the  consequent  loss  of  human  freedom  is 
the  very  touchstone  of  Calvinism  ! 

We  can  understand  how  the  official  acts  of  bad 
ecclesiastics  are  valid,  for  the  validity  of  their  sac- 
ramental acts  does  not  depend  upon  their  morality, 
but  on  their  priestly  character.  God,  it  may  be 
urged,  may  make  an  ass  a  mechanical  deliverer  of 
certain  sounds,  or  the  Spirit  may  apply  to  the  words 
of  Caiaphas  a  wider  than  the  speaker's  sense ;  but  as 
the  Holy  Spirit  cannot  dwell  in  bad  men  and  so  in- 
separably unite  them  to  God  as  to  make  them  the 
organs  through  whom  He  speaks,  the  infallibility  of 
those  who  by  the  grossness  of  their  sins  have  be- 
come separated  from  Christ  is  an  impossibility. 

It  has  been  argued  that  though  the  Bible  may  be 
God's  word,  yet  it  is  not  a  safe  guide,  since  those 
who  consult  it  may  and  often  do  err.  But  the 
same  objection  applies  to  the  Ro-man  rule.  Suppose 
the  pope  is  officially  consulted  and  gives  an  official 
response,  is  the  recipient  who  adopts  it  secured 


THE   RULE   OF   FAITH  137 

thereby  from  error?  Sergius,  patriarch  of  Constan- 
tinople, wrote  to  Pope  Honorius  to  declare  his 
opinion  on  a  very  important  theological  question 
which  concerned  the  nature  of  Christ.  The  pope 
did  so,  and  bade  Sergius  declare  his  decision.  The 
result  was,  that  both  Sergius  and  Honorius  were 
afterwards  condemned  as  heretics  by  the  sixth  ecu- 
menical council,  were  anathematized  and  declared 
cast  out  from  the  Holy  Catholic  Church. 

Again,  the  rule  of  faith  demands  that  the  neces- 
sary guide  should  really  be  a  guide.  Thus  it  is  ob- 
jected to  the  "Bible  only"  rule  that  it  is  not  the 
Bible  that  always  controls,  but  the  inquirer  often 
reads  into  it  his  own  presuppositions.  It  means 
what  he  wants  it  to  mean.  Does  not  the  same  ob- 
jection apply  to  the  papal  rule?  If  the  pope  is  the 
divinely  authorized  guide,  he  will  know  himself  to  be 
such,  and  will  consequently  know  and  act  on  the 
limitations  of  his  powers.  If,  for  instance,  the  case 
of  Galileo  was  one  of  scientific  fact,  he  would  have 
known  it  was  one  out  of  his  province,  and  so  would 
not  have  condemned  him.  If  it  was  for  an  erroneous 
construction  of  Scripture,  as  is  sometimes  claimed, 
Galileo  was  condemned,  then  the  pope  failed  of 
being  a  safe  guide  as  to  the  interpretation  of  God's 
word.  In  either  case  he  was  not  an  infallible  guide. 

Again,  if  the  pope  is  the  pastor  and  teacher  of  all 
Christians,  it  is  his  prerogative  and  duty  to  guard 
the  Church  from  false  doctrine.  When  heresies  arise, 
he  will  therefore  take  the  lead  in  suppressing  them. 
But  in  the  Arian  heresy  we  find  Pope  Liberius  apolo- 
gizing to  the  Arian  bishops  for  ever  having  defended 


138          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

Athanasius,  signing  a  deficient  Arian  creed,  and  giv- 
ing the  weight  of  his  influence  to  Arianism !  S.  Hil- 
ary exclaims,  "  Anathema,  I  say  to  thee,  Liberius ;  " 
and  a  third  time,  "Anathema  to  the  prevaricator 
Liberius."  Thus  in  this  contest  for  orthodoxy  over 
our  Lord's  deity  the  bishop  of  Rome  was  found  not 
to  be  a  safe  teacher  and  guide  of  the  Church. 

In  the  important  Pelagian  controversy,  which  was 
concerned  with  grace  and  free  will,  we  find  Pope  Inno- 
cent deciding  correctly.  But  we  also  find  his  suc- 
cessor, Zosimus,  being,  as  is  now  contended,  imposed 
upon  by  heretics,  siding  with  them.  He  did  so  until 
the  African  bishops,  in  council,  firm  in  their  resistance 
to  his  letters,  set  him  right.  In  the'  last  case  he  did 
not  guide  the  Church,  but  the  Church  guided  him. 

In  the  Monothelite  contest,  which  involved  the 
truth  of  the  two  natures  of  Christ,  with  two  wills, 
human  and  divine,  we  find  Pope  Honorius,  of  whom 
we  spoke  above,  giving  formally  his  sanction  to  the 
heretical  side,  declaring,  "  We  confess  one  will  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ."  It  is  now,  under  the  necessity 
of  upholding  the  late  decree  of  the  pope's  infallibility, 
contended  either  that  he  was  not  speaking  ex  cathe- 
dra, to  the  whole  Church,  or  probably  his  words  may 
bear  an  orthodox  meaning.  Granting  this,  it  is  an 
undisputed  fact,  however,  that  the  sixth  ecumenical, 
and  two  subsequent  councils  approved  by  popes, 
condemned  him  as  a  heretic.  We  have  thus  pope 
condemning  pope.  On  the  most  charitable  construc- 
tion (and  we  desire  to  give  it),  Pope  Honorius 
lamentably  failed  at  a  most  critical  time  to  be  the 
Church's  teacher  and  safe  guide. 


THE   RULE  OF   FAITH  139 

Another  objection  made  to  the  papal  rule  of  faith 
has  been  this :  A  rule  or  guide  to  the  faith  should 
not  be  contradictory.  The  Prote'stants  say  that  how- 
ever different  interpretations  may  be  put  on  Holy 
Scripture,  nevertheless  Holy  Scripture  itself  does  not 
change.  But  on  the  other  side  the  popes  do  change, 
and  what  one  has  held,  another  pope,  or  the  Church  in 
council,  has  denied.  For  instance,  Pope  Innocent  IIL 
(i  198)  declared,  "  I  can  be  judged  by  the  Church  for  i 
sin  concerning  the  faith."  Innocent  IV.  (1242)  said, 
"  A  pope  can  err  in  faith,  and  therefore  no  one  oughl 
to  say,  I  believe  what  the  pope  believes,  but,  what  the 
Church  believes."  Adrian  VI.  declared  "  that  it  was 
possible  for  popes  to  promulgate  heresy  in  decrees." 

Eugenius  IV.  said  that  the  decision  of  a  council  is  to 
be  preferred  to  the  sentence  of  a  bishop  of  Rome. 
Innocent  I.  and  Gelasius  held,  contrary  to  modern 
opinion,  that  "  infants  who  died  without  communion 
went  straight  to  hell."  Stephen  II.  taught  that  bap- 
tism administered  with  wine  was  lawful.  Nicholas  I. 
assured  the  Bulgarians  that  baptism  in  the  name  of 
Christ  was  valid.  Gregory  II.  decided  that  marriages 
between  a  freeman  and  a  slave  (they  might  be  of  the 
same  race)  might  be  dissolved.  Celestine  III.  held 
that  the  marriage  tie  was  dissolved  if  either  party 
became  a  heretic.  Urban  II.  declared  the  lawfulness 
of  killing  an  excommunicated  person.  Eugenius  IV. 
in  a  formal  document  misstated  the  form  and  matter  of 
holy  order,  making  the  delivery  of  the  instruments, 
the  paten  and  chalice,  essential  to  its  conveyance, 
which  if  true  would  have  nullified  the  orders  of  the 
first  thousand  years. 


140          CHRISTIAN  AND   CATHOLIC 

We  must,  in  order  to  uphold  the  modern  papal 
theory,  regard  these,  and  other  like  pronouncements 
with  them,  as  the  private  opinions  of  the  bishops  of 
Rome.  But  then  we  are  still,  so  far  as  the  rule  of 
faith  is  concerned,  in  the  same  difficulty.  Why  did 
they  not  resort  in  these  important  matters  to  their 
infallible  power  and  decide  correctly?  Not  to  exert 
a  power  so  essential  to  the  salvation  of  men  is  in  the 
highest  degree  criminal.  Either,  then,  the  popes  did 
not  know  they  possessed  this  assisting  gift,  in  which 
case  their  ignorance  proves  they  did  not  possess  it; 
or  by  giving  out  private  and  sometimes  erroneous 
opinions  they  have  failed  to  exercise  it,  and  so  shown 
that  they  are  not  safe,  still  less  infallible  guides. 

But  what  shall  we  say  in  presence  of  the  fact  that 
for  a  generation  or  more  there  have  been  rival  popes 
engaged  in  unhappy  contests  and  excommunicating 
one  another?  If  one  alone  was  the  true  pope,  one 
only  was  infallible.  But  how  was  the  Church  to  know 
which  of  the  claimants  was  infallible  and  which  not? 
There  were  saints,  we  are  told,  ranged  on  all  sides, 
which  seems  to  show  that  the  element  of  papal  infalli- 
bility was  not  a  necessary  part  of  the  rule  of  faith. 
There  has  been,  says  the  Protestant,  no  practical 
difficulty  as  to  what  was  the  Bible,  but  a  serious  one 
as  to  who  was  the  pope. 

But  be  all  this  as  it  may,  the  real  test  of  the  papal 
rule  is  the  same  as  that  of  the  Protestant:  is  it  the 
one  ordained  by  Christ?  Is  this  the  way  He  estab- 
lished, by  which  His  followers  should  know  what  they 
were  to  believe  and  do? 

We  are  here  obliged  as  before  to  answer  in  the 


THE   RULE   OF   FAITH  141 

negative.  If  it  had  been  the  rule  of  Christ,  it  would 
have  been  universally  known  as  such  and  acted  on 
from  the  beginning.  We  know  that  the  Orthodox 
Eastern  Church  has  never  recognized  its  existence. 
In  the  Roman  Communion,  the  papal  infallibility  was 
not  made  a  dogma  till  1 870.  Before  that  year  it  was 
indeed  denied  by  persons  in  authority  to  be  a  doc- 
trine of  the  Church.  In  "  Keenan's  Catechism,"  which 
had  the  imprimatur  of  Roman  bishops,  we  find  the 
question,  "  Must  not  Catholics  believe  the  pope  in 
himself  to  be  infallible?"  Answer,  "No;  that  is  a 
Protestant  invention ;  it  is  no  article  of  the  Catholic 
faith ;  no  decision  of  his  can  oblige,  under  pain  of 
heresy,  unless  it  be  received  and  enforced  by  the  teach- 
ing body,  that  is,  by  the  bishops  of  the  Church." 
The  same  was  stated  in  a  famous  work,  "  The  Faith 
of  Catholics,"  compiled  by  Fathers  Berington  and 
Kirk.  "  It  is  no  article  of  the  Catholic  faith  to  be- 
lieve that  the  pope  is  in  himself  infallible,  separated 
from  the  Church,  even  in  expounding  the  faith ;  by 
consequence,  papal  definitions  or  decrees,  in  what- 
ever form  pronounced,  taken  exclusively  of  a  gen- 
eral council  or  acceptance  of  the  Church,  oblige 
none." 

Now  the  rule  of  faith,  to  be  the  guide  to  truth, 
must  have  been  recognized  as  such  from  the  begin- 
ning. If  it  is  a  fatal  objection  to  the  Protestant 
theory  of  "the  Bible  and  Bible  only,"  that  the 
Bible  was  not  in  the  hands  of  the  people  till  the 
fifteenth  century,  it  is  equally  a  fatal  objection  to 
the  present  Roman  rule  that  its  element  of  the  papal 
infallibility  was  not  certified  to  the  Church  till  the 


142          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

nineteenth  century.     Rome,  in  this  respect,  is  three 
hundred  years,  more  modern  than  Protestantism. 

Let  us  turn  to  the  third  rule  to  guide  Christians. 
Christ  did  not  order  or  provide  for  any  book  to  be 
circulated.  He  forbade  our  following  any  one  person. 
"  Call  no  man  master."  He  endowed  His  Church 
with  the  Holy  Spirit,  making  the  Church  thereby  a 
living  organism,  through  which  He  acts,  gathering 
souls  into  His  saving  light  and  life.  In  the  Church 
are  to  be  found  the  Holy  Scriptures  and  the  sacra- 
ments. By  the  Church  the  Scriptures  are  preserved 
and  interpreted  to  our  enlightenment,  and  the  sacra- 
ments are  administered  for  our  reception  of  life.  We 
h^ar  the  voice  of  Christ  speaking  to  us  through  the 
Church  as  guided  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  it  interprets 
the  written  word,  and  makes  the  truth  known  within 
us  by  our  union  with  it. 

The  four  points  of  this  rule  of  faith  are  these :  - 
Christ  reveals,  the  Spirit  guards,  the  Church  utters, 
the  soul  comes  to  know  it. 

I.  The  first  point  means  that  Christ  not  only 
taught  certain  truths,  but  was  Himself  the  truth.  He 
is  the  logos,  the  wisdom  itself.  He  is  the  revelation. 
It  is  complete  in  Him.  What  He  was,  did,  and  said 
is  the  revelation  of  God  to  man. 

We  have  thus  an  answer  to  the  popular  saying  that 
we  are  living  in  an  age  of  enlightenment  and  new 
discoveries  and  must  not  be  tied  to  old  truths.  The 
answer  is  this :  A  distinction  must  be  observed  be- 
tween revealed  truth  and  all  other  truth.  The  latter 
depends  for  its  progress  on  observation  and  experi- 
ment. The  longer  the  world  lasts  the  more  time  it 


THE   RULE   OF  FAITH  143 

will  have  to  make  observations  and  experiments,  and 
so  the  wiser  it  will  grow.  But  it  is  different  with  the 
truth  revealed  in  Christ.  It  was  given  in  Him,  in  its 
completeness,  and  once  for  all.  While  therefore  it  is 
no  objection  in  any  other  class  of  truth,  that  a  pro- 
posed theory  is  new  or  destructive  of  what  has  gone 
before,  in  respect  of  Christian  truth,  it  is  an  obvious 
axiom  that  what  is  new  is  necessarily  false. 

II.  The  next  point  of  the  rule  of  faith  is :  The 
Spirit  guards  it.  Here  we  must  notice  the  office  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  in  its  relation  to  Christ.  The  Holy 
Spirit  does  not  dwell  in  the  Church  to  make  it  the 
organ  of  His  revelations,  for  the  Holy  Spirit  is  not 
the  revealer  of  truth,  but  Christ ;  who  is  the  revealer 
of  God  to  man.  The  office  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  to 
guide  the  Church  into  all  truth,  by  bringing  to  her 
remembrance  and  giving  her  an  understanding  of  all 
that  Christ  was  or  uttered  or  did. 

The  Holy  Spirit  in  the  performance  of  this  duty 
guides  and  guards  the  Church  in  two  ways,  by  en- 
lightening her  authorized  teachers,  and  by  His  over- 
ruling providence.  When,  in  consequence  of  the  rise 
of  a  heresy,  the  Church  in  council  is  obliged  to  de- 
fend the  faith,  the  Holy  Spirit  enlightens  the  bishops 
in  their  decisions  and  the  Church  in  its  acceptance  of 
them.  By  the  new  definition,  if  one  is  required,  the 
Church  clears  away  the  fog  of  error,  and  enables  her 
children  to  see  clearly  the  old  truth  which  had  been 
held  from  the  beginning.  When,  however,  the  Holy 
Spirit  sees  that  the  fathers  in  council,  being  under 
duress  or  deceived  by  forged  decretals,  are  likely  to 
go  wrong,  He  prevents  the  council's  decisions  from 


144         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

having  an  ecumenical  value.  This  is  done  in  various 
ways.  The  Church  does  not  give  her  consent  to  the 
conciliar  action,  or  God  overrules  the  divisions  of 
Christendom  to  the  preservation  of  the  Church  in 
her  teaching  office.  Thus,  while  in  the  one  case  He 
enlightens  the  Church,  enabling  her  to  speak,  He  also, 
when  she  would  go  wrong,  either  by  denying  or 
adding  to  the  faith,  lays  His  hand  on  her  mouth. 
Infallibility  has  been  preserved  by  the  division  of 
Christendom.  In  these  two  ways  the  Spirit  guards 
the  faith  once  revealed. 

III.  This  faith  thus  delivered  and  guarded  the 
Church  declares.  It  is  to  be  found  in  the  common 
consent  of  Christendom.  What  the  Church  has  from 
the  beginning  always  and  everywhere  declared  to  be 
the  faith  must  indeed  be  so.  For  it  is  not  possible 
that  a  divine  teacher  would  so  poorly  have  provided 
for  the  preservation  of  His  revelation  as  that  a  great 
majority  of  His  followers  would  fall  into  error.  This 
faith  so  proclaimed  has  been  also  protected  in  the 
accepted  creeds.  It  is  set  forth  in  the  liturgies  of  the 
Eastern  and  Western  Churches.  It  has  efficaciously 
been  proclaimed  by  the  sacraments,  which  may  be 
called  the  "  gospel  in  action."  In  respect  of  the 
Episcopal  government  of  the  Church,  the  three 
sacred  orders  of  the  ministry,  the  preserved  Apostolic 
succession  through  Episcopal  ordination,  the  Chris- 
tian priesthood,  and  the  real  presence  and  eucharistic 
sacrifice,  Catholic  Christendom  is  united.  Protestant- 
ism, having  lost  priesthood,  has  no  consciousness  of 
these  gifts.  But  wherever  the  Apostolic  priesthood 
has  been  preserved,  the  consciousness  of  all  Catholics 


THE    RULE   OF   FAITH  145 

proclaims,  by  words  and  heroic  lives  of  self-sacrifice, 
their  possession. 

We  may  regret  the  divisions  of  Christendom,  but' 
God  has  overruled  them  in  one  way  to  good.  In 
consequence,  the  Church  is  protected  from  adding 
with  Ecumenical  authority  any  articles  to  the  faith. 
This  is  an  advantage,  for  it  is  not  the  Church's  duty, 
nor  is  it  for  man's  good  for  her  to  answer  all  the 
questions  the  curiosity  of  theologians  may  choose  to 
ask.  The  Holy  Spirit  dwells  in  the  Church  to  protect 
her  in  the  truth  revealed  in  Christ  and  enable  man  to  be 
wise  unto  salvation.  What  she  has  not,  by  the  concur- 
rence of  her  several  parts,  declared,  she  merely  leaves 
as  matters  of  pious  opinion.  But  as  each  portion  of 
the  Church,  the  Eastern  and  Western,  the  Russian, 
Greek,  Roman,  and  Anglican,  proclaims  the  faith  of 
undivided  Christendom,  each  fulfils  its  prophetical 
office  and  their  respective  members  accept  it  on 
the  Church's  authority. 

The  Anglican  Church  has  not  become  reduced  to  like 
"  dogmatic  helplessness,"  as  Rome  when  for  seventy 
years  there  were  rival  popes.  She  maintains  the 
Catholic  faith  and  her  living  utterance  is  to  be  found 
in  her  Book  of  Common  Prayer.  In  America,  Dioce- 
san Courts  and  Courts  of  Review  are  established,  and 
appeal  lies  in  matters  of  doctrine  to  the  House  of 
Bishops.  In  England  the  Lincoln  judgment  shows 
that  the  metropolitan  has  not  lost  his  ancient  author- 
ity. And  let  the  fundamental  truths  of  the  creed  be 
denied  and  a  bishop  like  Colenso  or  priests  like  Dr. 
Crapsey  and  Rev.  McQueary  are  deposed. 

The   voice    of  the  Catholic  Church  in  each  divi- 


146          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

sion  of  it  is  thus  not  a  dead  but  an  authoritative  and  a 
living  voice.  It  is  a  living  and  continuous  utterance. 
Her  conciliar  decisions,  for  example,  are  not  like  those 
of  a  secular  court.  What  she  declared  of  old  at 
Nicsea  and  elsewhere  she  has  continued,  day  by  day, 
at  thousands  of  altars  and  by  hundreds  of  millions  of 
her  children,  to  declare.  As  one  approaches  Niagara, 
the  traveller  gradually  recognizes  the  deep  undertone 
of  the  falls,  solemn  as  the  judgment,  unfailing  as 
eternity.  But  the  ears  of  the  townspeople  become 
paralyzed  to  the  awful  utterance  and  only  the  atten- 
tive ear  hears  the  deep  diapason  of  the  water's  voice. 
So  it  is  with  the  Catholic  Church.  She  is  ever  pro- 
claiming, in  the  midst  of  the  world's  tumultuous  babel 
of  contending  utterances,  the  faith  once  and  for  all 
delivered  to  the  saints,  and  the  wise  and  humble- 
minded  listeners  hear  her  living  voice.  It  is  a  voice 
coming  up  from  behind  and  yet  as  present  with  them, 
saying,  "  This  is  the  way,  walk  ye  in  it." 

The  Christian  soul  comes  with  increasing  clear- 
ness of  vision  and  certainty  to  know  the  truth. 
Drawn  by  prevenient  grace  to  accept  Christ,  the 
newly  baptized  becomes  united  to  the  Church  and 
so  becomes  a  living  stone  in  that  spiritual  temple 
which  is  filled  with  the  Holy  Spirit.  As  a  member 
of  this  temple  and  so  spiritually  illuminated,  the 
Christian  soul  hears  the  voice  of  the  Spirit  speaking 
in  and  through  it.  At  first,  like  a  child  it  believes 
what  it  is  told  to  believe.  As  it  advances  in  light 
under  the  Church's  paternal  authority,  the  Holy 
Scriptures  are  seen  to  corroborate  the  Church's  teach- 
ing and  the  proficient  is  able  to  give  a  reason  for  the 


THE   RULE   OF   FAITH  147 

faith  that  is  in  him.  As  he  acts  on  the  faith,  he  be- 
comes gradually  transformed  by  it.  He  then  not 
only  holds  certain  truths,  but  the  truth  takes  posses- 
sion of  him.  He  advances  from  belief  based  on 
authority  and  reason  to  the  certainty  that  comes  from 
possession.  He  knows  in  whom  he  believes.  For 
Christ  dwells  in  him  and  he  in  Christ. 

This  is  the  Catholic  rule  of  faith,  ,the  rule  Christ 
established  when  he  told  us  to  "  hear  the  Church," 
and  "  if  any  man  will  do  His  will  he  shall  know  of 
the  doctrine." 


CHAPTER  IX 
SACRIFICE 

LISTENING  to  the  common  tradition  preserved 
in  our  race,  we  find  it  bearing  witness  that  sac- 
rifice in  some  form,  not  necessarily  with  blood-shed- 
ding, has  been  from  an  unknown  antiquity  a  recognized 
mode  of  man's  approach  to  his  apprehended  Deity. 
It  is  found  in  the  non-Semitic  as  well  as  the  Semitic 
races.  It  has  ever,  and  everywhere,  been  regarded 
as  a  typical  act  of  religion. 

Naturally  we  ask,  what  is  the  origin  and  significance 
of  this  religious  function?  We  have  to  admit  that,  so 
far  as  history  goes,  the  answer  is  lost  in  the  mist  of 
the  unveiled  past.  We  can  only  gather  up  the  scat- 
tered hints,  and  from  what  we  know  of  man,  make  our 
surmises  as  best  we  may.  Man,  finding  himself  in  the 
presence  of  powers  before  which  he  felt  his  impotence, 
powers  awful  and  gigantic,  manifested  in  silent  orderly 
rise  of  tides,  bellowing  clouds,  upheaving  earthquakes, 
volcanic  fires  or  majestic  march  of  sun  and  stars,  may 
have  been  led  to  make  offerings  to  the  deities  his 
imagination  personified  them  to  be.  It  was  a  natural 
anthropomorphic  conception.  The  sense  of  fear 
and  the  desire  for  protection,  not  unlikely,  are,  then, 
the  primeval  motives  of  his  action.  The  social  and 
ethical  may  have  come  later.  The  gods  of  the  race's 
childhood  were  gods  of  the  mountains  and  valleys,  of 


SACRIFICE  149 

the  rivers  and  the  clouds,  of  the  sun  in  the  heaven,  of 
the  vivifying  forces  of  nature  on  earth.  Powerless 
before  them  in  their  destructive  potency,  man's 
instinct  of  self-preservation  cried  within  him,  "  Give 
the  god  something.  He  is  angry,  let  us  appease  him ; 
he  is  protecting  us,  make  him  an  offering."  The  con- 
ception of  what  would  be  acceptable  would  be  deter- 
mined by  their  conception  of  his  character.  Thus 
by  some  external  act  man's  apprehensions  or  grati- 
tude may  have  expressed  themselves  in  varying  forms 
of  offering  to  the  unseen. 

Possibly,  with  his  developing  ethical  perceptions, 
the  desire  for  friendly  intercourse  came  to  add  a 
further  element  to  his  oblations.  Nature  has  her 
beneficent  as  well  as  her  terror-striking  aspects. 
Earth  and  sea  and  sky  are  swathed  in  beauty,  and 
nature's  storehouse  is  full  of  pleasurable  gifts.  All 
things  develop  and  live  in  reciprocal  action. 
Nothing  lives  apart,  but  is  dependent  on  other  lives. 
The  song  of  nature  is  of  union  and  love.  Not 
abnormally,  then,  the  concept  of  some  kind  of  fellow- 
ship with  the  energies  which  were  man's  companions 
began  to  find  expression.  The  sense  of  kinship 
follows  close  to  the  primitive  one  of  dependence. 
So  along  with  the  gift  there  comes  to  be  associated 
the  desire  for  mutual  recognition.  The  two  parties 
to  the  sacrifice  partake  together  of  the  offering.  The 
participation  in  a  common  meal  becomes  a  function 
of  the  sacrificial  rite.  The  manner  and  matter  of 
it  may  differ.  The  offerer  may  thus  pour  a  portion 
of  the  wine  upon  the  ground  as  a  libation  to  his 
god.  The  Greek  hero  may  spread  his  feast  at 


150          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

which  the  gods  attend.  The  Jew,  beneath  the  shelter 
of  the  tabernacle  tent,  may  partake  of  the  peace 
offering  he  has  made.  The  heathen  temple  of  a  more 
costly  construction  becomes  a  banqueting  house. 
However  degraded  and  degrading  its  orgies,  the 
basic  conception  was  that  of  a  mutually  recognized 
fellowship.  Thus  the  germinal  religious  instinct 
began  its  development  in  man.  It  was  as  yet  un- 
fettered by  locality.  The  woods  were  God's  first 
temples.  The  sacrifice  required  no  specially  con- 
structed altar  or  ritual.  But  what  begins  in  some- 
thing primarily  crude  is  often  found  to  have  an  unex- 
pected depth  and  capacity  of  development.  "  It  is  a 
testimony  of  the  unity  which  underlies  and  binds 
together  the  gradual  unfolding  of  thought  and  life  " 
in  the  story  of  the  universe. 

An  interesting  question  here  arises  whether,  orig- 
inally, any  official  or  representative  in  a  priestly 
capacity  was  necessary.  As  sacrifice  was  an  offering 
of  the  individual  man  to  God,  we  might  suppose  it 
so  began.  Abel  and  Cain  are  said  to  have  offered 
sacrifices.  But  man  is  a  social  being ;  Montesquieu 
said,  "  He  is  born  in  society  and  there  he  remains." 
If  in  the  earliest  stages  of  his  existence  he  is  not  a 
member  of  a  tribe,  yet  he  must  needs  be  of  a  family. 
The  instances  in  the  Old  Testament  in  patriarchal 
times  represent  him  as  the  father,  and  acting  in  an 
official  capacity  as  head  and  representative.  Thus  we 
read  of  Job  and  Noah  and  Abraham  and  Jacob  build- 
ing altars  and  offering  sacrifices.  They  are  all 
fathers,  and  the  heads  and  so  priests  of  their  family. 
As  the  tribal  condition  develops  we  find  the  rulers 


SACRIFICE  151 

and  judges,  like  Gideon  and  Manoah  and  Samuel, 
making  offerings  to  God.  In  the  enlargement  of 
tribal  to  the  fuller  corporate  national  life,  King 
Solomon  prepared  sacrifice  at  the  first  temple's  dedi- 
cation. It  is  the  developed  corporate  conditions  of 
mankind  that  demands  for  its  religious  functions 
official  representation.  So  we  find  also  among  the 
non-Semitic  nations,  in  Babylon  and  Egypt  and  else- 
where, an  order  of  priesthood  developed  along  with 
the  national  life.  Among  the  Jewish  people  priest- 
hood came  by  commandment  of  God  to  belong  to 
a  family,  that  of  Aaron.  It  thus  became  hereditary. 
It  was  continued  by  the  law  of  natural  descent  from 
the  high  priest  Aaron,  just  as  in  the  Gospel  the 
priesthood  is  continued  by  the  law  of  a  spiritual 
descent  by  an  Apostolical  succession  from  the  high 
priest  Jesus  Christ.  As  the  one  was  exclusive,  so  it 
foreshadowed  that  the  other  was  to  be.  The  one, 
as  of  earthly  descent,  had  no  assurance  of  permanence. 
The  other  partakes  of  the  abiding  character  of  Him 
who  liveth  a  priest  forever. 

Conformably  to  the  developed  religious  national 
needs  the  sacrifices  established  became  necessarily 
of  a  twofold  character.  They  were  the  expression 
of  the  nation's  corporate  life  and  also  of  the  in- 
dividual's relation  to  God.  The  two  great  feasts  of 
the  Passover  and  the  Day  of  Atonement  were  the 
religious  expression  of  the  nation's  gratitude  to  God 
for  its  deliverance  and  for  the  maintenance  of  its 
covenanted  relation  to  Him.  The  other  fourfold 
sacrifices  express  the  individual's  varying  attitude  to 
the  Almighty.  The  whole  burnt  offering  told  of  the 


152         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

duty  of  man's  entire  outward  and  inward  consecration, 
the  peace  offering,  of  the  reconciliation  and  established 
communion  between  man  and  his  Maker,  the  two  sin 
offerings,  of  man's  penitence,  proffered  reparation, 
and  of  God's  forgiveness,  and  man's  restoration  to 
covenanted  privileges. 

Providentially  directed  sacrifice  had  now  become 
organized  and  a  priesthood  established.  But  all 
developments  are  attended  with  their  dangers,  all 
elevations  with  their  temptations,  all  gifts  of  God 
with  their  possibilities  of  misuse.  The  magnificent 
equipment  of  worship  with  which  God  had  endowed 
the  Jew,  was  exposed  to  the  subtle  degradation  of 
ceremonial  formalism  —  a  degradation  so  subtle  and 
potential  as  to  evacuate  of  all  its  worth  the  efficacy 
of  sacrificial  worship.  God  had,  in  His  loving  wisdom, 
revealed  to  Moses  a  worship  patterned  after  the  un- 
seen verities  of  heaven.  It  was  a  worship  beautiful, 
choral,  liturgical,  ritualistic,  sacrificial ;  but  unless  the 
heart,  mind,  and  will  of  the  worshipper  entered  into 
and  went  with  it,  it  was  valueless.  Sacrifice,  to  be 
pleasing  to  God  and  efficacious  to  man,  must  be  no 
mere  outward  gift.  God  was  not  to  be  placated  by 
ten  thousands  of  burnt  offerings  or  rivers  of  oil  or 
wine.  More  valuable  than  the  hecatombs  of  animal 
sacrifices  was  the  sacrifice  of  the  broken  and  contrite 
heart.  So,  while  God  established  the  Levitical  sacri- 
fices, through  the  prophets  He  declared  with  intensi- 
fying emphasis  the  need  of  the  interior  sacrifice ;  for 
the  sacrifice  to  be  acceptable  and  profitable  the 
inward  and  the  outward  must  coalesce. 

This  brings  us  to  the  further  development  of  the 


SACRIFICE  153 

law  of  sacrifice  as  it  is  presented  in  Christ.  All 
Christians  look  to  Him  as  fulfilling  in  His  own  person 
its  highest  conceptions.  He  fulfils  its  Levitical,  or- 
dained, outward  expression  and  its  prophetically 
required  inward  spirit.  By  manifold  types  the  Levit- 
ical ceremonial  foreshadowed  the  blood-shedding  and 
sacrifice  consummated  on  Calvary.  The  evangelical 
prophet,  commonly  known  as  Isaiah,  in  words  which 
have  profoundly  moved  the  heart  of  Christendom,  has 
given  us  His  inward  life.  He  was  to  make  on  the 
cross  the  offering  of  the  bloody  sacrifice  typified  by 
the  Aaronic  ritual,  and  also  was  to  be  the  Man  of 
Sorrows  acquainted  with  grief,  who  makes  His  soul 
an  offering  for  sin.  If  the  Levitical  order  depicts  one 
who,  after  the  order  of  Aaron,  fulfils  the  legal  ritual, 
the  prophets  foretold  His  interior  self-oblation. 

We  find  this  conjunction  of  the  inward  and  outward 
proclaimed  in  the  New  Testament.  In  the  epistle  to 
the  Hebrews,  the  Holy  Spirit  represents  Christ  as  the 
victim,  whose  blood  is  shed  on  earth,  entering  as 
the  high  priest  within  the  Holy  of  Holies.  Just  as 
the  high  priest  of  the  Jewish  order  carried  and 
sprinkled  the  blood  of  the  sacrifice  in  the  most  holy 
place,  upon  the  mercy  seat,  so  Christ  entering  within 
the  veil  carries  and  presents  the  blood  that  has  passed 
through  death  to  the  Eternal  Father.  The  blood  so 
presented,  not  only  meritoriously  pleads,  it  is  the 
source  of  our  new  life.  For  His  life-giving  blood  is 
living  by  its  connection  with  His  divinity.  By  virtue 
of  its  union  with  His  own  Eternal  Spirit,1  it  becomes 
the  medium  of  communicating  to  our  soul  and  spirits 
*  Heb.  ix.  14. 


154          CHRISTIAN   AND    CATHOLIC 

purging  of  conscience  and  spiritual  life.  In  the  same 
epistle  which  declares  His  priesthood  and  sacrifice 
of  blood,  we  learn  also  of  the  interior  offering  of  His 
will,  by  which  will  we  are  sanctified. 

The  Apostolic  writers  also  bring  out  this  coales- 
cence of  the  inward  and  outward  in  Jesus  Christ. 

S.  Paul,  guided  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  gives  us  the 
forensic  and  legal  aspect  of  His  sacrifice  who,  as 
the  second  Adam  and  as  a  propitiation,  achieved  on 
the  cross  redemption  for  us.  S.  John,  who  pillowed 
on  Christ's  breast,  reveals  His  interior  life  and  His 
self-consecration :  "  For  their  sakes  I  consecrate  my- 
self." 

Thus  in  our  Lord  we  discern  the  dual  action,  His 
inward  oblation  and  its  outward  manifestation. 

Moreover,  Christ  was  a  priest  after  two  orders ;  He 
was  a  priest  after  the  order  of  Aaron,  and  after  the 
order  of  Melchisedek.  After  the  first  He  offers  Him- 
self with  shedding  of  blood  on  the  cross.  It  is  His 
own  offering.  Speaking  of  His  life  He  says,  "  I  have 
power  to  lay  it  down  and  I  have  power  to  take  it 
again."  On  the  cross  we  behold  Him  offering  Him- 
self to  God,  the  Holy  to  the  Holy,  in  perfect  and 
loving  obedience.  There  He  offers  Himself,  obedient 
unto  death,  in  reparation  for  the  sins  of  the  humanity 
with  which  He  has  identified  Himself.  There,  per- 
fect love,  consummated  in  the  supremest  act  of  pen- 
itence on  our  behalf,  reconciles  man  to  his  Maker. 
There  He  makes  a  full,  perfect,  and  sufficient  sacrifice, 
oblation,  and  satisfaction  for  the  sins  of  the  whole 
world.  There  He  is  seen  exercising  His  triple  offices 
of  Priest,  Prophet,  and  King.  As  Priest  for  the  guilty 


SACRIFICE  155 

He  intercedes :  "  Father  forgive  them."  As  King 
He  opens  to  the  penitent  the  kingdom  of  heaven: 
"  To-day  shalt  thou  be  with  me  in  Paradise."  As 
Prophet  He  consoles  and  reveals  the  principle  of 
the  Church's  unity.  It  is  to  be  one  by  the  bond 
of  divine  charity,  which  shall  unite  its  members  to- 
gether and  unite  them  in  Himself.  "  Son,  behold  thy 
Mother;  Mother  behold  thy  son." 

As  priest,  after  the  order  of  Melchisedek,  He  offers 
Himself  in  the  upper  chamber.  It  was  the  new 
temple  taken  by  virtue  of  His  prophetical  insight  and 
divine  sovereignty.  It  was  built  thus  without  sound 
of  axe  or  hammer,  but  by  the  word  of  His  power. 
Here  we  behold  Him  eternal  in  His  generation, 
unique  in  His  office,  consummating  the  life-long,  free- 
will offering  of  Himself.  "  Now  when  Jesus  knew  that 
His  hour  was  come  that  He  should  depart  out  of  this 
world  unto  the  Father,  .  .  .  and  knowing  that  the 
Father  had  given  all  things  into  His  hands  and  that 
He  was  come  from  God  and  went  to  God ;  He  riseth 
from  supper  and  laid  aside  His  garments "  (sym- 
bolical of  putting  aside  the  glory  He  had  with  the 
Father  before  the  world  was)  "  and  took  a  towel  and 
girded  Himself"  (as  having  taken  and  girded  His 
divine  nature  with  our  humanity),  and  with  the  water 
He  had  Himself  poured  out,  took  the  soiled  feet  of 
His  disciples  into  His  own  hands  and  washed  and 
wiped  them  with  the  towel  wherewith  He  was  girded. 
Then  presently  He  proceeded  to  bless  and  break  the 
bread,  saying,  "  This  is  my  body  which  is  being  broken 
for  you.  This  cup  is  the  new  covenant  in  my  blood 
which  is  shed  for  many."  Like  Melchisedek  He  brings 


156         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

forth  bread  and  wine,  and  making  them  what  His 
Word  declares  them  to  be,  offers  Himself  as  a  free- 
will sacrifice  to  God.  The  action  in  the  upper  cham- 
ber and  on  the  cross  are  parts  of  the  one  great 
sacrifice.  The  inward  and  outward  perfectly  coalesce. 
Our  great  high  priest  embraces  and  fulfils  the  re- 
quirements of  the  Levitical  law  and  the  inward 
spiritual  oblation  of  the  Prophets. 

We  have  come  now  to  see,  in  this  its  highest 
expression,  the  personal  element  that  enters  into 
religious  sacrifice.  It  is  not  to  be  the  gift  of  some- 
thing to  God,  but  of  the  person  along  with  the  gift. 
Regarding,  then,  religion  as  the  bond  which  unites 
man  to  God,  sacrifice  appears  to  be  the  outward  act 
by  which  it  expresses  itself.  It  is  an  established 
means  of  worship  and  man's  communion  with  Deity. 
It  is  the  revealed  way  by  which  the  creature  acknowl- 
edges his  position  towards  God,  and  offers  himself 
along  with  his  gift  to  Him.  It  is  also  the  ordained 
means  by  which  God,  accepting  the  gift,  returns, 
according  to  the  creature's  spiritual  condition,  a  gift 
according  to  his  needs.  It  is  this  reciprocal  sacra- 
mental action  between  God  and  man  by  means  of 
sacrifice  that  has  been  so  popularly  overlooked. 

Regarding  it  in  this  large  sense  we  shall  expect  to 
find  it  in  all  dispensations.  And  we  do  so.  We  find 
it  existing  in  paradise,  and  under  the  law,  and  in  the 
kingdom  of  grace,  and  in  glory. 

In  paradise  the  creature  man  was  in  an  innocent 
state,  consequently  the  form  of  his  sacrifice  expressed 
this  condition.  The  ordained  matter  of  the  sacrifice 
was  the  tree  of  knowledge.  The  tree  was  symbolical 


SACRIFICE  157 

of  man's  innocence.  There  it  stood,  waving  its  green 
banners,  choral  with  the  symphony  of  winds  and  birds, 
beautiful  with  its  buds  and  flowers,  fragrant  with  the 
incense  of  dew  and  blossoms,  glorious  in  the  sunshine 
and  with  the  stars  for  its  vesper  lights.  It  was  typical 
of  man's  dual,  animal  and  spiritual,  nature,  having 
its  root  in  the  earth  but  reaching,  in  its  aspirations, 
heavenwards.  By  abstaining  from  its  fruit  man  offered 
it  up  in  sacrifice  to  God,  and  offered  himself  along 
with  it.  For  it  tested  and  called  into  action  his  whole 
nature.  It  called  for  a  bodily  act  of  self-denial,  and 
so  touched  his  animal  nature.  It  affected  also  every 
department  of  his  intellectual  and  moral  one.  He 
was  by  his  memory  to  keep  in  mind  that  it  was  that 
tree,  however  undistinguished  from  the  others.  It 
called  for  the  sacrifice  of  his  reason.  He  was  to  obey 
the  divine  command,  although  there  was  no  apparent 
reason  for  his  obedience.  It  was  a  command  based 
on  a  mystery  which  he  could  not  fathom,  but  which 
his  heart  could  accept.  By  his  obedient  act  of  ab- 
stinence, he  united  himself  to  the  offering,  and  so 
doing  God  designed  to  give  Himself  back  to  the 
creature.  Man  would  give  himself  to  God,  God  would 
give  Himself  to  man.  By  outward  gift  of  the  tree 
of  knowledge  man  would  submit  himself  to  God  ;  by 
the  returning  gift  of  the  tree  of  life,  God  would  bestow 
a  fuller  gift  to  man. 

The  same  principle  is  seen  under  the  patriarchs. 
The  changed  character  of  the  sacrifice  denotes  the 
changed  relation  of  man  to  God.  Disobedience  hav- 
ing separated  man  from  God,  he  must  offer  a  sacrifice 
which  shall  symbolize  his  separated  condition.  By 


158          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

sin  he  has  lost  grace,  and  has  come  under  a  law  of 
death.  Instead  of  the  tree,  beautiful  with  life  and 
fragrant  with  blossoms,  for  one  offering,  there  must 
now  be  the  slaying  of  the  victim  and  the  cry  of  pain. 
It  symbolizes  his  condition.  It  is  an  acknowledg- 
ment of  his  transgression  and  the  righteousness  of  its 
penalty.  But  offered  in  humble  faith  to  God,  God 
will  correspondingly  give  to  man  certain  temporal  and 
covenanted  blessings  vouchsafed  by  his  feeding  on 
the  offering,  and  the  pledge  of  a  promised  Redeemer. 

When  at  length  Christ  comes  the  same  law  is  dis- 
cernible. A  new  form  of  sacrificial  worship  is  estab- 
lished. In  the  kingdom  of  grace  we  offer  the  Holy 
Eucharist.  We  break  the  bread  and  bless  the  cup 
which  signifies  the  breaking  of  the  holy  body  and 
the  outpouring  of  the  precious  blood.  By  this  sacra- 
mental action  we  set  forth  before  the  Eternal  Father 
the  saving  act  of  Calvary.  We  proclaim  in  the  spiritual 
body  of  Christ  the  mystery  of  the  Lord's  death  till 
He  comes.  And  what  we  offer  God  gives  us  back 
to  feed  upon. 

While  Christ  had  but  one  body,  and  that  which  is 
present  in  the  sacrament  is  one  with  His  glorified 
body  (for  the  body  which  Christ  has  now  is  the  same 
He  took  of  the  Blessed  Virgin  and  which  hung  on 
the  cross  and  rose  from  the  dead),  the  action  repre- 
sented and  pleaded  on  our  earthly  altars  is  the  act 
performed  on  earth.  Into  heaven,  Christ,  as  the  high 
priest,  carried  the  living  blood  sprinkled  upon  Him- 
self as  the  Mercy  Seat.  "  The  Mercy  Seat  or  Cap- 
poreth  was  the  golden  lid  which  covered  the  sacred 
ark,  and  upon  which  the  blood  of  a  bullock  or  goat 


SACRIFICE  159 

was  sprinkled  at  the  yearly  feast  of  expiation.  This 
lid  covered  not  only  the  ark,  containing  the  law,  but l 
the  law  itself.  The  blood  of  the  appointed  victims 
only  becomes  propitiatory  when  it  is  on  the  Cap- 
poreth."  2  Christ,  as  the  "  propitiation,"  3  is  identical 
with  the  Capporeth,  which  signifies  Christ  sprinkled 
with  His  own  blood.4  So  He  in  Himself  is  the 
Hebrew  "  Capporeth  "  or  Propitiation.  The  offering 
of  the  Church  on  earth  is  one  in  substance  with  that 
in  heaven,  but  it  symbolically  sets  forth  and  pleads 
by  the  breaking  of  the  bread  and  the  consecration  of 
the  wine  the  sacrificial  action  made  on  Calvary. 

The  Church  in  her  sacrificial  worship  thus  offers 
and  presents  to  God  Christ  as  her  representative  and 
head.  The  whole  body  of  the  Church  in  heaven  and 
earth  unitedly  does  this  in  one  continuous  action. 
Moreover,  the  individual  members  of  Christ's  body 
offer  themselves  to  God  in  union  with  the  sacrifice 
with  which,  by  participation,  they  are  united.  What 
they  corporately  offer  to  God,  that  God  gives  back 
to  them  individually.  The  Eucharistic  sacrifice  is 
thus  a  theandric,  a  reciprocal  God  and  man,  action 
and  the  ordained  form  of  Christian  worship. 

In  the  condition  we  call  that  of  "  glory  "  there  is  no 
mystical,  symbolical  immolation  as  in  the  Eucharist, 
no  actual  one  as  on  the  cross.  But  there  the  Church 
perpetually  offers  itself  up  to  God  through  Christ  its 
high  priest  and  head,  and  the  Almighty  gives  Him- 
self back  in  ever-flowing  streams  of  life  and  blessing 
through  the  Incarnate  God.  The  necessary  condition 

1  Exod.  xxx.  6.  8  Rom.  iii.  25. 

2  Lev.  xvii.  n  ;  xvi.  14,  15.  4  Liddon's  Ep.  Rom.  iii.  25. 


160          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

of  secured  sinlessness,  and  so  of  an  eternally  advanc- 
ing felicity,  depends  upon  this  perpetual  reciprocal 
activity.  The  tree  of  life  is  on  either  side  of  the  river. 
The  law  of  communion  with  God  is  ever  the  same. 
Sacrifice  is  the  eternal  law  of  the  creature's  life  and 
the  ordained  means  of  communion  with  deity.  It 
is  a  necessity  of  religion,  and  there  is  no  complete 
religion  without  it.  For  it  is  on  man's  part  an  ex- 
pression of  his  condition  and  duty  to  God,  and  on 
God's  part  a  gift,  through  or  associated  with  the  offer- 
ing, to  man.  It  is,  in  the  relation  that  man  has  with 
God,  what  the  vivifying  law  of  exchange  is  in  nature. 
Nothing  lives  to  itself  alone.  Each  must  give  of  its 
life  for  other  life,  and,  in  giving,  enrich  its  own.  Earth 
and  air  and  sea  and  sky  live  in  this  loving  fellowship. 
They  are  ever  imparting  to  one  another,  and  receiving 
a  responsive  benefit.  The  sea  yields  itself  to  the  sky's 
warm  smile,  and  the  sky  returns  its  gift  with  showers. 
The  strong  mountain  shelters  the  valley,  the  valley 
holds  up  its  cup  of  moisture  for  the  mountain  to  drink. 
The  angels  by  service  pour  back  their  lives  into  the 
divine  fount  of  life,  and  from  thence  wells  forth  to 
them  responsive  tides  of  bliss.  Sacrifice  is  aligned 
to  this  law  of  relationship,  and  so  is  as  lasting  as  the 
relationship  between  God  and  man. 

To  this  Protestantism  is  apt  to  reply  that  our  Lord 
made  an  offering  for  man  once  for  all,  and  that  He 
having  fulfilled  the  prophecies  concerning  the  Mes- 
sianic sacrifice,  sacrifice  forever  passed  away.  We 
must  eagerly  respond  that,  when  this  objection  springs 
from  a  sincere  desire  to  guard  the  all-sufficiency  of 
Christ's  atoning,  piacular,  vicarious  sacrifice,  we  can 


SACRIFICE  161 

but  honor  it.  It  cannot  be  too  sacredly  guarded. 
His  sacrifice  was  efficaciously  offered  for  the  whole 
race.  It  was,  by  virtue  of  the  divinity  of  His  person, 
of  infinite  value.  It  needs  no  supplementing,  and 
nothing  can  be  added  to  it.  It  was  all-sufficient 
and  complete  in  itself,  and  by  it  God  and  man  were 
reconciled.  We  can  do  nothing,  and  nothing  is  of 
any  virtue,  apart  from  it.  But  it  does  not  follow 
from  this  that  sacrifice  has  ceased  and  is  no  longer 
an  element  of  worship.  The  Church  worships  with  a 
sacrifice  of  prayer  and  thanksgiving  as  she  presents 
to  God  her  blood-sprinkled  Redeemer  and  Lord. 
She  worships  as  she,  in  obedience  to  the  divine 
command,  makes  and  offers  the  memorial  of  Christ's 
death.  Her  children  worship  as  they  make,  what 
was  done  once  for  humanity,  available  by  partici- 
pation for  their  own  individual  needs  and  sins. 

It  is  only  an  impoverished  Protestantism  that,  hav- 
ing lost  its  full  Christian  heritage,  fails  to  discern  it. 
The  testimony  given  by  the  consciousness  of  united 
Christendom  is  overwhelmingly  in  favor  of  the  reten- 
tion of  sacrifice.    The  Russian  and  Greek  communions, 
with  their  one  hundred  and  fifty  millions  of  members,! 
the  Roman,  with  its  two  hundred  and  fifty,  and  the ', 
Anglicans,  all  in  their  inherited  liturgies,  have   re- ' 
tained  sacrifice.     In  the  American  book  of  common ' 
prayer   it   is,  in   the    communion    service,  most  ex- 
plicitly stated.     After  the  consecration  of  the  sacred 
elements,  the  priest,  standing,  and  so  in  the  priestly 
position,  makes  an  oblation  of  them  to  Almighty  God. 
He  says,  "  We  Thy  humble  servants  do  celebrate  and 
make  here  before  Thy  Divine  Majesty,  with  these  Thy 


162          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

holy  gifts,  which  we  now  offer  unto  Thee,  the  memo- 
rial Thy  Son  hath  commanded  us  to  make."  "  The 
Holy  Eucharist,"  says  Bishop  Christopher  Words- 
worth, in  his  Commentary,1  "  partakes  of  the  char- 
acter of  a  sin-offering  and  of  a  peace-offering.  In 
that  blessed  sacrament  there  is  both  an  oblation  to 
God  and  there  is  a  participation  by  man.  In  it  the 
meritorious  blood  of  Christ  which  was  shed  once  for 
all  on  the  cross,  ...  is  re-presented  and  pleaded 
before  God.  And  in  it  the  blood  of  Christ  is 
sprinkled  on  the  souls  of  all  penitent  and  faithful 
receivers."  The  testimony  in  favor  of  sacrifice  is 
practically  universal.  Churchman  and  non-church- 
man both  bear  witness,  one  positively,  the  other 
negatively.  For  Protestantism  having  lost  the  priest- 
hood necessarily  lost  sacrifice,  and  the  real  objective 
presence  of  Christ's  body  and  blood  in  the  Eucharist 
and  their  Christian  consciousness  cannot  bear  wit- 
ness to  something  they  do  not  possess.  Their  neg- 
ative testimony,  therefore,  confirms  that  of  the  vast 
majority  of  Christians  who,  possessing  the  priesthood, 
have  retained  belief  in  the  real  presence  of  Christ's 
body  and  blood  and  the  sacrifice  of  the  altar. 

If,  then,  we  consider  what  the  whole  Church,  East 
and  West,  taught  before  the  rise  of  Protestantism,  we 
see  that  all  but  a  small  fraction  of  Christians  held  to 
the  practice  of  a  sacrificial  worship.  To  apply  here 
our  rule  of  faith,  we  cannot  believe,  if  Christ  was  a 
teacher  sent  from  God,  He  could  have  so  badly 
taught  His  followers,  that  almost  all  should,  on  so 
vital  a  matter,  have  been  led  into  error.  What  the 

1  Exod.  xxiv.  6. 


SACRIFICE  163 

Holy  Spirit,  speaking  through  the  common  Christian 
consciousness,  declares,  must  be  true,  for  the  Spirit 
of  truth  cannot  be  a  liar.  The  worship  of  God  by 
sacrifice  is  thus  proved  to  be  the  Gospel  method,  and 
the  Eucharist  the  ordained  Christian  sacrifice. 

But  how  are  we  to  meet  the  argument,  based  on 
Scripture,  that  Christ  once  for  all  offered  Himself  a 
sacrifice  for  sin. 

It  may  help  us  to  understand  this  if  we  recall  the 
fact  that  there  was,  in  the  former  dispensation,  a 
division  between  the  sacrifices.  Some  sacrifices  were 
for  individual  offerings  and  others  were  of  a  corporate 
character.  God,  as  we  know,  deals  with  us  both  as 
individuals  and  in  our  corporate  capacity.  In  the 
latter  He  deals  with  us  as  a  nation  or  a  race.  We 
find  Him  thus  delivering,  by  the  paschal  meal  and 
the  blood  sprinkled  on  the  door-posts,  Israel's  first 
born  from  death,  and  the  nation  from  Egyptian  bond- 
age. Its  yearly  memorial  was  a  national  act  of 
renewed  gratitude  to  God,  and  a  pledge  of  God's 
continued  protection  to  the  nation.  God  also  estab- 
lished the  nation  in  a  covenanted  relation  to  Himself 
when  Moses  took  the  blood,  part  of  which  had  been 
offered  on  the  altar,  and  with  the  other  portion 
sprinkled  it  on  the  people,  saying,  "  Behold  the 
blood  of  the  covenant  which  the  Lord  hath  made 
with  you."  And  year  by  year,  on  the  day  of  atone- 
ment, by  its  special  sacrifices  was  the  nation  recon- 
ciled and  the  covenant  on  God's  part  renewed. 

We  can  now  see  from  the  relation  which  the  day 
of  atonement  and  its  sacrifices  bore  to  the  Jewish 
nation,  what  is  the  relation  of  the  atonement  made 


164          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

on  Calvary  to  the  Christian  Israel.  On  the  Jewish 
holy  day,  the  whole  regular  order  of  the  daily  temple 
sacrifices  stopped.  The  whole  ecclesiastical  machin- 
ery, so  to  speak,  ran  down.  The  high  priest  put  off 
his  glorious  vestments,  the  regular  daily  offerings 
could  not  be  made.  The  whole  nation,  as  a  nation, 
must  first  be  reconciled  to  God.  When  that  work 
was  accomplished,  then  the  priests  resumed  their 
functions  and  the  power  to  offer  the  daily  sacrifices 
was  restored.  These  were  the  representatives  and 
extension  of  that  one  great  yearly  sacrifice  on  the 
day  of  atonement  on  which  they  legally  depended 
for  their  efficacy.  Thus  the  day  of  atonement  did 
not  make  worship  by  sacrifice  to  cease,  but,  on  the 
contrary,  enabled  it  to  go  on.  In  like  manner  Christ 
offered  Himself  on  the  cross.  He  offered  Himself 
for  the  race  as  an  entity.  His  act  need  not  and  can- 
not be  repeated.  It  was  unique.  He  was  "  once 
offered  to  bear  the  sins  of  many."  "This  man 
offered  one  sacrifice  for  sin,"  the  one  sacrifice  by 
which  God  and  man  were  reconciled.  By  it  the  race, 
in  its  corporate  capacity  as  a  race,  human  nature  as  a 
nature,  man  regarded  as  man,  was  brought  into  a 
restored  relationship  with  God.  This  work  once 
accomplished  can  neither  be  repeated  nor  added  to. 
It  is  complete.  The  seal  of  our  Lord's  word  rests 
upon  it.  "  It  is  finished."  But  as  the  day  of  atone- 
ment, which  reconciled  the  Jewish  nation,  did  not 
cause  the  worship  by  sacrifice  to  cease,  neither  does 
the  atoning  act  which  reconciled  mankind.  As  the 
Jewish  atonement  restored  to  the  nation  the  privilege 
of  offering  its  daily  sacrifices,  so  that  made  by  Christ 


SACRIFICE  165 

gave  to  His  people  the  right  of  offering  the  more  ac- 
ceptable gospel  sacrifices.  And  that  sacrifices  were 
to  continue,  S.  Paul  tells  us  when  he  says  that  the 
"  heavenly  things,"  that  is  the  members  of  the  new 
Christian  dispensation,  should,  in  contrast  with  the 
members  of  the  former  one,  "  be  purified  with  better 
sacrifices."  *  Chiefest  and  most  acceptable  among 
them  is  that  our  Lord  ordained  when  He  said  to  His 
Apostles,  "  Offer  this  as  a  memorial  of  Me."  We 
do  not,  therefore,  by  the  Eucharistic  sacrifice,  deny 
the  uniqueness  or  all-sufficingness  of  the  one  sac- 
rifice of  the  cross,  nay,  we  establish  it. 

The  Eucharist  is  the  gospel  sacrifice  and  it  is  a 
sacrifice  of  fourfold  aspects.  It  is  a  sacrifice  of  praise 
and  thanksgiving,  for  in  the  canon  the  priest  asks 
God  to  accept  it  as  such.  It  is  also  a  sacrifice  of 
prayer  or  the  calves  of  our  lips.  "  We  pray  that  we 
and  all  Thy  whole  Church  may  obtain  remission  of 
our  sins  and  all  other  benefits  of  His  Passion."  It 
is  a  sacrifice  of  ourselves.  "  We  offer  ourselves, 
our  souls  and  bodies,  to  be  a  reasonable,  holy,  and 
living  sacrifice  unto  Thee."  The  Church  also  offers 
and  presents  Him,  her  Head,  and  pleads  His  death 
and  merits  for  herself  and  her  children.  On  the 
cross  Christ  died  for  humanity;  by  the  offering  of 
the  Eucharistic  sacrifice  we  as  individuals  plead,  and 
appropriate  that  sacrifice  to  ourselves.  Once  the 
command  concerning  sacrifice  was  "  touch  not,"  now 
it  is  "offer";  once  it  was  "eat  not,"  now  it  is  "eat 
and  live." 

While  it  is  a  truth  that  Christian  worship  must  be 

i  Heb.  ix.  23. 


166         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

expressed  by  sacrifice,  yet  it  is  also  true  that  sacrifice 
is  not  the  only  revealed  mode  by  which  man  is  to 
approach  God.  There  have  ever  been  two  ordained 
modes  of  approach,  viz.,  by  word  only,  and  by  act. 
In  Paradise  we  find  both;  man  offers  by  sacrificial 
worship  the  tree ;  he  also  communes  with  God  repre- 
sented as  abiding  with  man  in  the  garden.  So  under 
the  law,  the  synagogue  and  its  worship  developed 
along  with  that  of  the  temple.  So  in  the  Christian 
Church,  along  with  the  great  gospel  sacrifice,  came 
the  development  of  the  divine  office.  The  Anglican 
Church  has  preserved  in  her  prayer-book  both  the 
two  divinely  appointed  forms,  that  of  synagogue 
worship  and  that  of  the  temple.  The  higher,  the 
more  important  and  efficacious  is  the  sacrifice  of  the 
altar.  There  Christ,  always  abiding  in  the  midst  of 
His  Church,  in  a  special  way  manifests  Himself.  The 
bread  becomes  His  body,  wine  becomes  His  blood. 
He  veils  His  glory  under  sacramental  forms,  and  the 
whole  Church  in  heaven  and  earth,  with  angels  and 
archangels,  unites  in  jubilant  worship.  She  presents 
Christ  as  her  Head,  and  presents  herself,  in  Christ, 
before  Almighty  God.  It  is  the  worship  of  the 
Church  in  the  Church  by  the  Church.  It  is  an  act 
performed,  not  in  the  domain  of  nature,  but  in  that 
of  Christ's  mystical  body.  It  is  neither  governed  by 
any  known  physical  laws,  nor  can  it  be  sounded  by 
human  metaphysics.  From  first  to  last  everything 
connected  with  the  Blessed  Sacrament  and  the  holy 
sacrifice  belongs  to  the  spiritual  order  of  the  new 
creation.  The  Church  and  Altar  by  their  consecra- 
tion have  become  incorporated  into  it,  and  are  cov- 


SACRIFICE  167 

enanted  meeting-places  between  God  and  man.  The 
priests  are  spiritual  officers  set  apart  and  empowered 
by  the  Holy  Spirit  for  their  work.  The  faithful  are 
not  mere  ordinary  natural  beings,  but  are  spiritually 
endowed  persons  and  living  stones  of  the  spiritual 
temple.  Christ's  body  and  blood  which  are  present 
are  now  in  a  glorified  condition,  and  emancipated 
from  that  of  His  visible  earthly  state.  By  the  words 
of  Christ  and  the  Holy  Spirit  the  earthly  elements 
are  transmuted  into  the  heavenly  realities.  By  faith 
we  spiritually  partake,  to  our  body  and  soul's  health, 
of  the  spiritual  food  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ. 
By  spiritual  but  real  incorporation  into  Christ,  the 
whole  body  of  the  faithful  rises  into  the  divine  fel- 
lowship and  progresses  in  its  union  with  God. 

It  was  not  a  copy  of  heathen  rites  or  a  survival  of 
Jewish  traditions  that  led  the  Church  to  make  her 
sacrificial  offering  liturgical,  choral,  symbolical.  Her 
illuminated  vision  had  caught  sight  of  the  heavenly 
service  and  the  Divine  Spirit  taught  her  to  mould 
her  liturgy  after  it.  In  the  Gospels  the  Church  was 
only  in  an  inchoate  and  formative  preparatory  condi- 
tion and  our  Lord  said  little  about  its  worship.  But 
when  the  Church  had  been  formed  and  led  out  from 
Judaism,  as  of  old  Israel  had  been  led  out  of  Egypt, 
then  as  God  took  Moses  up  and  showed  him  the 
things  in  heaven,  which  were  to  be  the  pattern  of 
the  tabernacle,  so  He  took  up  S.  John,  and  the  glory 
of  the  worship,  with  its  lights  and  incense  and  anthem 
and  antiphonal  choirs  and  musical  instruments  and 
priestly  hierarchy  and  devout  prostrations  and  song 
of  the  redeemed  and  prayers  of  saints  and  dazzling 


168          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

splendor  of  throne  and  circling  rainbow  and  the 
shining  sea,  became  a  directory  for  the  Church.  She 
learnt  from  heaven  itself  how  to  worship  God  in 
spirit  and  in  truth. 

No  churchman  but  would  emphasize  the  supreme 
importance  of  the  inward  spirit  to  all  that  is  outward. 
But  it  is  well  to  remember  two  things :  that  the  in- 
ward will  not  be  elevated  by  stern  repression  of  the 
outward,  as  Quakerism  unwisely  thought,  and  that  no 
concessions  to  the  world  or  sectarianism  will  ever  win 
their  members  to  the  Church.  True  to  her  heavenly 
guidance,  the  Church  must  hold  fast  to  her  inherited 
faith  and  worship.  To  a  general  daily  revival  of  the 
Eucharist,  the  victory  of  the  Anglican  Church  will  be 
given.  But  for  it  to  avail,  the  offering  of  the  inward 
and  the  outward  must  coalesce.  There  must  be  an 
enthusiastic  revival  of  the  spirit  of  entire  consecration. 
Men  and  women  must  give  themselves  to  God  with 
the  same  devotion  as  men  lay  down  their  lives  in 
battle  for  the  sake  of  their  country.  They  must  be- 
come living  sacrifices  in  union  with  that  of  Calvary 
and  the  Altar. 


CHAPTER  X 

THE   CHRISTIAN    MINISTRY 

OUR  first  inquiry  is,  how  do  we  know  that 
Christ  intended  there  should  be  an  established 
ministry?  A  class  of  Christians  calling  themselves 
"  Friends  "  deny  that  it  was  so  proposed.  We  have 
in  this  sect  individualism  carried  to  its  consistent, 
logical  outcome.  There  cannot  be  in  such  a  concep- 
tion of  Christianity  either  a  ministry  or  sacrament. 
Church  history  has,  however,  triumphed  over  this 
spiritual  idealism.  Christ  did  institute  a  sacrament  by 
which  persons  were  made  members  of  an  organized 
Christian  society. 

If  every  organization  requires  officers  how  shall 
they  be  appointed?  If  an  organization  is  a  humanly 
made  one  and  the  officers  represent  its  members  and 
derive  their  authority  from  them,  most  appropriately 
they  should  be  chosen  by  those  whom  they  represent. 
But  if  it  is  a  divinely  founded  institution,  and  the 
ministers  are  the  ambassadors  of  the  Founder,  then  it 
is  obvious,  however  designated,  that  they  must  receive 
their  authority  from  Him.  Moreover,  if  the  Founder 
is  not  the  unseen  Divine  Being,  but  the  Incarnate 
God-Man,  the  authority  to  act  for  Him  is  appro- 
priately given  and  certified,  as  in  the  case  of  the 
ambassador  of  an  earthly  monarch,  by  a  visible  and 
ordained  instrumentality.  If  the  duty  of  the  officer 


i;o          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

requires  that  he  guard  sacred  things,  have  a  care  oi 
souls,  bless  in  God's  name,  and  serve  God  by  offering 
sacrifice,  then  he  is  not  only  an  ambassador  but,  in 
Old  Testament  language,  a  priest. 

It  is  sometimes  said  that  the  ministers  of  the  new 
dispensation  are  never  called  priests  in  God's  word. 
But  such  we  read  in  the  Old  Testament,  the  ministers 
of  the  Gospel  were  to  be.  In  that  blessed  gospel- 
time  men  were  to  be  gathered  out  of  all  nations,  "  and 
I  will  also  take  of  them  for  priests  and  for  Levites, 
saith  the  Lord."  1  The  character  of  priesthood  was 
to  change,2  but  priesthood  was  never  to  cease.3 
Sacrifice  was  to  be  offered  everywhere  in  all  lands.4 
Under  the  Gospel  it  was  to  be  of  surpassing  efficacy. 
In  the  Church  this  prophecy  has  been  fulfilled,  and 
from  earliest  times,  throughout  Christendom,  East 
and  West,  Russian,  Greek,  Roman,  and  Anglican, 
sacrifice  and  priesthood  have  been  preserved.  These 
are  as  clear  and  marked  characteristic  signs  of  the 
true  Church  as  the  sun  is  in  the  heavens.  Where 
they  are  not  we  have  man-made  societies,  but  not  the 
Church  founded  by  Jesus  Christ.  Sacrifice,  as  we 
have  seen,  is  the  very  essence  of  God's  ordained 
form  of  worship,  and  sacrifice  offered  by  a  corporate 
society  postulates  the  necessity  of  a  priesthood. 

Its  development  into  the  three  orders  which  now 
exist,  and  their  special  powers  are  an  interesting 
study. 

The  genesis  of  our  triple  ministry  lies  hidden  in  the 
recesses  of  the  evolution  of  the  Jewish  nationality.  God 

1  Isa.  Ixvi.  21.  »  Jer.  xxxiii.  18. 

a  Heb.  vii.  12.  *  Mai.  i.  n. 


THE   CHRISTIAN   MINISTRY          171 

inspired  their  prophets  and  seers  with  the  vision  of  a 
coming  one,  who  should  be  the  anointed  from  on  high 
and  the  restorer  of  Israel.  The  more  keenly  enlight- 
ened saw  in  the  prophetic  mist  the  figure  of  one  who 
would  be  the  burden  bearer  and  the  emancipator  of 
mankind.  Around  their  belief  in  the  coming  Messiah 
were  clustered  all  the  hopes  and  aspirations  of  Israel. 
In  the  midst  of  his  national  afflictions,  in  the  dis- 
heartening dreariness  of  the  captivity,  the  Jew  held 
fast  to  the  traditions  of  his  race  and  the  covenanted 
promise.  When  the  great  Messiah  should  come,  he 
would  be  at  once  a  prophet,  priest,  and  king.  "  The 
Lord  God,"  so  the  great  lawgiver  declared,  "  will 
raise  up  unto  thee  a  prophet  like  unto  me,  unto 
whom  ye  shall  hearken." l  "  He  shall  be  a  priest," 
said  Zechariah,2  and  king.  "  Behold,  thy  king  cometh 
unto  thee :  He  is  just,  and  having  salvation ;  lowly,  and 
riding  upon  an  ass,  and  upon  a  colt  the  foal  of  an 
ass."  3 

Into  the  threefold  office  of  this  Messiahship  Jesus 
was  anointed.  He  took  not  upon  Himself  this  honor, 
but  was  called  of  God  by  a  formal  consecration,  as  was 
Aaron.4  It  was  the  office  of  the  greatest  of  all  the 
Hebrew  prophets  to  perform  this  act.  Jesus  was 
sealed  from  on  high.  The  heavens  were  opened,  and 
the  Spirit  of  God  descended  upon  Him,  and  the  voice 
from  heaven  declared  His  Sonship.  At  His  baptism 
Jesus  was  anointed  with  the  Spirit  as  the  Messiah  or 
Christ. 

1  Deut.  xviii.  15.  *  Zech.  ix.  9. 

«  Zech.  vi.  13.  *  Heb.  v.  4,  5 ;  vii.  21. 


i;2         CHRISTIAN  AND   CATHOLIC 

We  must  here  note  the  difference  sometimes  for- 
gotten between  His  mediatorship  and  His  Messiah- 
ship.  Respecting  the  first  He  claimed  to  be  both  the 
Son  of  Man  and  the  Son  of  God.  As  the  God-Man, 
joining  the  two  natures  in  His  one  person,  He  is  the 
mediator.  His  office  of  mediator  is  to  be  the  living 
way  between  the  created  and  uncreate.  He  is  like  a 
bridge  between  the  two.  As  God  He  touches  the 
divine  life,  for  He  is  of  one  substance  with  it.  As 
man  He  touches  the  side  of  creation,  with  which  by 
His  incarnation  He  has  identified  Himself.  There 
is  no  other  possible  way  of  our  entering  into  and 
being  made  partakers  of  the  divine  life,  and  so  attain- 
ing to  eternal  bliss,  save  by  an  incorporation  into 
Christ,  who  is  the  living  way.  As  the  Messiah,  He 
is  the  anointed  one,  exercising  the  three  offices  of 
prophet,  priest,  and  king. 

It  has  been  urged  by  sectarians  against  the  exist- 
ence of  a  priesthood  in  the  Christian  dispensation, 
that  Christ  did  not  call  Himself  a  priest.  This  may 
be  true.  Indeed  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  we 
read,  "  that  if  He  were  on  earth,  He  should  not  be  a 
priest,  seeing  that  there  are  priests  who  offer  gifts 
according  to  the  law."1  Yet  in  the  same  epistle,  very 
emphatically,  is  His  consecration  as  a  priest  asserted, 
and  He  is  again  and  again  called  our  high  priest. 
The  explanation  is  easy.  He  was  not  like  a  Jewish 
priest,  but  of  a  new  and  higher  order.  Priesthood 
was  not  to  be  abolished,2  but  only  the  priesthood 
changed.  So,  lest  the  Jews  should  confound  His 
priesthood  with  that  of  the  Aaronic  one,  our  Lord  in 
1  Heb.  viii.  4.  2  Heb.  vii.  12. 


THE   CHRISTIAN   MINISTRY          173 

His  public  ministry  avoids  the  use  of  the  term.  He 
calls  Himself,  however,  the  Christ,  which  includes 
all  three  offices ;  and  when  He  has  ascended,  by 
an  epistle  which  was  written  under  the  inspiration 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  His  high  priestly  character  is 
explicitly  asserted.  He  declares  His  priestly  office 
when  He  says  that  He  will  "  give  His  life  a  ransom 
for  many." 

The  Church  is  the  mystical  body  of  Christ,  and  as 
such  is  identified  with  His  priesthood  and  sacrifice. 
This  identity  Christ  declared  when  He  said,  "  I  am 
the  Vine,  ye  are  the  branches."  Christ  and  His 
members  form  thus  one  body.  The  Holy  Spirit 
declares  the  same  truth.  The  body  is  one,  and  all 
the  members  of  that  one  body  are  one  body.  "  Ye  are 
the  body  of  Christ."  *  The  idea  of  a  body  implies 
generation,  birth,  members,  functions,  corporate  rela- 
tionship, unification.  S.  Peter  2  speaks  of  its  members 
as  newborn  babes,  as  the  offspring  of  a  king  and 
a  priest,  as  forming  thus  a  generation,  as  united  as  a 
holy  nation  and  a  royal  priesthood,  as  built  up  as  living 
stones,  a  spiritual  temple,  as  being  an  holy  priesthood 
to  offer  up  spiritual  sacrifices,  acceptable  to  God  by 
Jesus  Christ.  Christians  thus  collectively  form  one 
priesthood,  and  the  individual  members  of  the  body 
share,  in  different  degrees,  in  its  exercise.  So  it  is 
said  of  them,  "  they  shall  be  priests  of  God  and  of 
Christ."3 

Thus  from  the  oneness  of  the  Church  with  Christ, 
her  Head,  comes  her  priestly  character.  "  Priest  and 
sacrifice,"  said  Dr.  Moberly,  "  are  the  very  heart's 

1  i  Cor.  xii.  12-27.  2  i    S.  Pet.  ii.  2-9.  »  Rev.  xx.  6. 


1/4          CHRISTIAN   AND    CATHOLIC 

core  of  what  He  became  as  Man.  The  Church,  as 
His  mystical  Body,  is  wholly  made  one  with  His 
manhood,  and  therefore  is  one  with  His  priesthood 
and  sacrifice."  The  Church  is  not  a  mere  aggre- 
gation of  believers,  but  is  an  organism  welded  into 
oneness  by  the  indwelling  Spirit.  It  possesses  as 
such  that  which  it  has  received  from  Christ  and  acts 
in  its  corporate  capacity.  In  her  highest  act  of  wor- 
ship she  presents  Christ  as  her  all-sufficient  oblation, 
and  offers  herself  up  as  a  living  victim  in  union  with 
Him.  Sacrifice  is  the  law  and  means  of  her  union 
with  God,  and  priesthood  is  essential  to  it. 

If  then  the  head  of  the  Church  is  our  high  priest, 
and  the  Church  is  a  body  of  priests,  it  follows  that  the 
officers  of  the  body  would  be  priests.  They  neces- 
sarily would  be  clothed  with  all  the  special  powers  of 
priesthood  which  their  offices  required.  That  they 
were  so,  we  have  the  consentient  testimony  of  all 
portions  of  Catholic  Christendom.  It  will,  however, 
be  helpful  to  study  the  process  by  which  our  Lord,  as 
the  high  priest,  prophet,  and  king,  trained  and  com- 
missioned and  finally  consecrated  those  who  were, 
as  the  officers  of  the  Church,  to  be  teachers,  rulers, 
and  priests,  under  Him ;  and  then  how  they  were  to 
transmit  their  authority  to  others. 

The  method  has  all  the  slowness,  hiddenness,  and 
progressiveness  that  is  a  characteristic  of  divinity. 
Christ  held  in  Himself  the  threefold  office  of  the 
Messiahship.  He  was  the  prophet,  priest,  and  king. 
Having  called  His  twelve  disciples  He  gradually  and 
by  progressive  commissions  associated  them  with 
Himself.  During  His  visible  ministry,  when  He  was 


THE   CHRISTIAN   MINISTRY          175 

especially  exercising  His  prophetical  office,  He  began 
to  unite  the  twelve  to  His  office  of  teacher.  Having 
first  continued  all  night  in  prayer  to  God,  "  He 
ordained  twelve,  that  they  should  be  with  Him,  and 
that  He  might  send  them  forth  to  preach." l  It  was 
at  first  a  limited  commission.  As  His  own  personal 
ministry  was  then  confined  to  Israel,  theirs  was  to  be 
so  likewise.  After  His  resurrection,  having  defeated 
the  ruler  of  this  world,  and  by  right  of  conquest  ex- 
tended His  kingdom  to  its  prophetical  dimensions,  He 
then  gave  them  jurisdiction  in  all  nations  and  over  all 
peoples.  At  first  they  were  to  preach  only,  saying, 
"  The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand,"  but  after  the 
resurrection  they  were  to  make  disciples,  "  teaching 
them  to  observe  all  things  I  have  commanded  you." 
They  had  then  a  wider  commission  to  teach,  and  in 
their  collective  capacity,  to  do  so  with  authority. 
"  If  a  man  neglect  to  hear  the  Church,  let  him  be 
unto  thee  as  a  heathen  man  and  a  publican."  2  When 
our  Lord  formally  began  the  great  function  of  His 
priesthood  in  the  upper  chamber,  He  then  associated 
the  twelve  with  His  priestly  office.  None  others  were 
present.  They  alone  were  commissioned  to  "  do " 
or  "offer"  the  memorial  of  His  death  and  sacrifice. 
When  He  had  risen  as  the  great  victor  over  death  and 
hell,  during  the  great  forty  days  He  made  the  disci- 
ples partakers  of  His  royal  prerogatives.  They  were 
to  make  persons  subjects  of  His  kingdom  by  baptism. 
They  were  to  restore  to  their  allegiance  by  absolu- 
tion those  who  had  fallen  away.  So  did  Christ  grad- 
ually and  progressively  associate  the  twelve  with  His 

l  S.  Mark  iii.  14.  2  S.  Matt,  xviii.  17. 


i;6         CHRISTIAN  AND   CATHOLIC 

threefold  offices.  They  were  to  be  under  Him,  in 
His  Church,  prophets,  priests,  and  kings. 

But  though  by  these  separate  acts  they  were  com- 
missioned, by  one  act  were  they  finally  empowered. 
They  received  a  gift  of  the  Spirit,  "  actual "  or  "  aiding  " 
grace  when  Christ  breathed  on  them.  But  at  Pen- 
tecost, as  John  had  foretold,  Christ  baptized  the 
Church  with  fire  and  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  Holy 
Ghost  came  and  dwelt  in  the  Church.  The  Holy 
Ghost  had  first  dwelt  in  the  humanity  of  Christ,  for 
the  Spirit  was  given  without  measure  unto  Him.  But 
without  leaving  Christ,  He  enters  into  Christ's  mys- 
tical body.  The  anointing  flows  down  from  Aaron's 
beard  even  to  the  skirts  of  his  clothing.  He  fills  the 
Church  with  His  presence  and  makes  it  a  living  thing. 
It  had  been  like  Adam's  body  before  God  breathed 
into  it  the  breath  of  life.  The  Holy  Ghost  by  His 
indwelling  made  the  Church  a  living  spiritual  organ- 
ism. He  filled  all  the  Church,  uniting  all  its  members 
to  Christ  and  to  one  another  in  Him.  He  also 
empowered  the  twelve  to  perform  effectively  those 
offices  into  which  they  had  been  gathered.  They 
became  thereby  "  able  ministers  of  the  Word," 
enabled  to  do  what  Christ  had  commissioned  them 
to  do.  Thus  was  an  order  of  ministry  formed  by  Christ 
the  high  priest  within  the  royal  and  priestly  body 
to  be  representative  prophets,  priests,  and  kings. 

But  we  have  as  yet  arrived  at  but  one  order ;  how 
did  it  come  to  pass  that  the  present  three  orders  of 
bishops,  priests,  and  deacons  were  evolved  out  of  it? 
We  may  not  be  able  to  trace  the  whole  process  in  all 
its  details.  A  complete  knowledge  of  process  is  not 


THE   CHRISTIAN    MINISTRY          177 

necessary  for  the  demonstration  of  a  fact.  We  will 
however  say  this :  The  Church's  order  of  govern- 
ment was  not  established  by  the  Apostles  in  obe- 
dience to  a  written  or  explicitly  revealed  constitution. 
It  was  evolved  under  the  inward  guidance  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  and  the  pressing  needs  of  outward 
circumstances.  This  formative  process  was  appar- 
ently divided  into  two  stages  of  development:  the 
filling  up  of  the  number  of  the  twelve,  and  the 
extension  of  the  Apostolic  ministry. 

In  this  process  we  may  observe  that  there  were 
two  great  facts  respecting  the  Church,  concerning 
which  the  Apostles  needed  to  be  especially  taught. 
They  were  so  important  that  God  did  it  by  two  object- 
lessons.  The  two  facts  were,  that  Christ  and  that  the 
Holy  Ghost  abode  in  the  Church.  The  Lord  had 
not,  by  His  ascension,  left  it.  The  Holy  Ghost  had 
not  come  to  take  the  place  of  an  absent  Lord.  The 
Church  by  the  living  bond  of  the  Spirit  was  united  to 
Christ  her  Head.  By  the  Spirit  Christ  was  made 
effectively  present  in  His  mystical  body.  The  Apos- 
tles were  to  have  it  impressed  on  them  that  Christ  and 
the  Spirit  were  the  abiding  source  of  all  authority 
and  life.  The  presence  of  these  two  Persons  was 
witnessed  by  the  consecration  of  S.  Matthias,  in  the 
filling  up  of  the  twelve,  and  of  S.  Paul  subsequently 
in  the  extension  of  the  Apostolate. 

Now  Matthias  could  not  in  the  interval  before 
Pentecost  be  consecrated  by  the  Apostles.  They 
could  not  by  the  laying  on  of  hands  join  any  into 
their  order,  for  the  Apostolic  order  itself  was  not 
yet  fully  constituted.  Neither  could  they  in  any  way 


178          CHRISTIAN   AND    CATHOLIC 

impart  the  Holy  Spirit,  for  the  Spirit  was  not  yet 
given.  All  they  could  do,  in  that  inchoate  condition, 
was  to  ask  the  Lord  to  designate  whom  He  had 
chosen  to  fill  up  the  vacancy.  This  the  Lord  did. 
Then  Matthias  being  thus  called  (as  they  themselves 
had  been)  was  along  with  themselves  consecrated  an 
Apostle  by  Christ  and  the  Spirit  at  Pentecost. 

Let  us  turn  to  the  case  of  S.  Paul.  At  Pentecost, 
the  Holy  Spirit  not  only  consecrated  the  Apostolic 
order  as  the  representative  of  Christ,  as  prophet, 
priest,  and  king,  but  along  with  other  gifts  to  the 
Church  inspired  some  as  prophets  to  be  a  special 
witness  of  Himself.  Thus  the  Church  is  built,  we 
are  told,  on  "  the  foundation  of  the  Apostles  and 
prophets,  Jesus  Christ  being  the  chief  corner-stone." 
By  the  prophets  the  truth  was  evidenced  that  the 
Holy  Spirit  was  not  a  mere  influence,  but  a  person 
to  whom  the  Apostles  were  subordinate  and  whom 
they  were  to  obey.  Now  the  two  facts  of  which  we 
are  speaking,  of  Christ  and  the  Holy  Spirit  abiding 
in  the  Church,  we  see  clearly  expressed  in  the  conse- 
cration of  S.  Paul.  Christ  as  dwelling  in  the  Church 
appears  to  Saul  on  the  Damascus  roadway,  and  gives 
Him  His  Apostolic  commission,  as  He  had  done 
before  in  His  visible  ministry  to  the  Twelve.  But 
though  the  Apostles  could  now  consecrate,  it  being 
since  Pentecost,  yet  for  their  instruction  a  unique 
action  of  the  Holy  Spirit  occurred.  "  Now  there 
were  at  Antioch  certain  prophets,"  and  as  they  min- 
istered to  the  Lord  and  fasted,  the  Holy  Ghost  said, 
"  Separate  (i.  e,,  consecrate)  me  Barnabas  and  Saul 
for  the  work  whereunto  I  have  called  them.  And 


THE   CHRISTIAN   MINISTRY          179 

when  they  had  fasted  and  prayed  and  laid  hands  on 
them,  they  sent  them  away."1  Paul  having  been 
personally  called  by  Christ  was  empowered  by  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  so  became  an  Apostle,  called  and 
consecrated  just  as  the  Twelve  had  been.  He  could 
claim  to  be  "  Paul,  an  Apostle,  not  of  men,"  not  as 
representing  them,  "  neither  by  man,"  not  as  author- 
ized by  human  authority,  but  by  "  Jesus  Christ  and 
God  the  Father."  So  it  was  in  the  case  of  S. 
Barnabas.  There  was,  however,  this  difference.  Paul 
was  called  by  Christ  who  visibly  and  miraculously 
appeared  to  him.  Barnabas  was  called  by  the  Holy 
Ghost,  who  miraculously  spoke  audibly  and  called 
Barnabas  through  the  Church.  Then  they  were  alike 
empowered  by  the  Spirit  as  the  Twelve  were  at! 
Pentecost. 

But  although  by  this  on  a  spiritual  equality  with 
the  Twelve,  neither  Paul  nor  Barnabas  could  act 
independently  of  them.  They  must  be  gathered  into 
the  Apostolic  fellowship,  receive  from  them  jurisdic- 
tion, and  become  subject  to  the  Church's  discipline.2 
These  two  unique  cases  give  no  sanction  to  any  min- 
istry unconnected  with  Apostolic  authority.  They 
were  not  of  the  original  twelve  founders  whose  office 
as  witnesses  to  the  resurrection  was  unique.  The 
"  Twelve,"  and  the  "  prophets  "  as  foundations,  form 
groups  distinct  by  themselves,  and  as  such  they  were 
to  pass  away.  The  prophetical  gifts  were,  however, 
to  continue  diffused  in  the  Church.  The  Apostolate 
was  to  unfold  itself  into  the  three  orders. 

Thus  we  come  to  the  second  stage  in  the  formation 

1  Acts  xiii.  I.  2  Gal.  ii.  9. 


i8o          CHRISTIAN  AND   CATHOLIC 

of  the  Christian  ministry,  or  its  development  into  the 
three  orders.  Pressed  by  the  Church's  growing  needs, 
the  Apostles  began  to  gather  persons  into  different 
degrees  of  fellowship  with  themselves,  and  so  with 
Christ ;  making  them  thereby  partakers  of  His  three- 
fold office  and  giving  them  the  Holy  Ghost  for  its 
performance. 

First  we  have  the  genesis  of  the  diaconate.  In 
consequence  of  the  disputings  between  the  Grecians 
and  Hebrew  converts,  the  Apostles  were  compelled 
to  set  apart  seven  for  a  certain  work.  Their  original 
duties  were  something  more  than  that  of  almoners, 
for  they  were  to  be  men  "  full  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and 
wisdom."  They  were  not  merely  chosen,  but  formally 
ordained  by  prayer  and  imposition  of  hands.  "They 
were  set  before  the  Apostles,  and  when  they  had 
prayed,  they  laid  their  hands  upon  them."  The 
spiritual  character  of  their  office  is  seen  in  the  con- 
duct and  ministrations  of  Stephen  and  Philip.  They 
can  preach  and  baptize.  Later  we  find  the  order 
officially  recognized  by  S.  Paul  in  his  salutation  to 
the  Philippians,  where  he  addresses  "  the  bishops  and 
deacons."  The  personal  qualifications  of  admission 
are  set  forth  in  the  epistle  to  S.  Timothy. 

Next,  as  the  Church  is  extended  by  Apostolic 
labors,  we  find  S.  Paul  ordaining  "  overseers "  or 
"  elders  "  in  every  Church.  We  have  here  the  rise  of 
the  second  order  of  the  Christian  ministry.  The  use 
of  a  double  title  is  very  significant  of  their  office.  In 
whatever  way  it  came  about,  a  reverent  Christian  mind 
believes  it  was  of  God's  ordering.  It  was  not  unfitting 
that  a  ministry  that  was  to  be  world  wide  should,  by 


THE   CHRISTIAN   MINISTRY  181 

the  Holy  Spirit,  be  designated  by  titles  expressive  of 
both  Gentile  and  Jewish  ideas.  The  title,  episcopos, 
or  overseer,  being  taken  from  the  Greek,  the  title 
presbyter  or  elder  being  of  Hebrew  origin.  More- 
over, as  this  second  order  was,  unlike  the  diaconate, 
to  share  in  the  priestly  and  the  kingly  offices,  they 
had  two  names  given  them.  As  "overseers"  they 
partake  of  the  Apostles'  power  of  government  in  their 
respective  localities,  and  as  "  elders,"  they  are  gathered 
into  union  with  the  Apostles'  priestly  functions. 

The  connection  between  the  title  "elder  "and  the 
priesthood  has  sometimes  been  overlooked.  It  has 
been  thought  to  have  been  taken  from  the  name  of 
the  ruler  of  the  Jewish  synagogue.  But  the  title 
"  elder  "  did  not  belong  exclusively  to  that  office.  It 
was  a  generic  term  applicable  to  any  ruler,  and  so  we 
read  of  the  elders  of  cities.  It  was  not  therefore 
necessarily  taken  from  the  synagogue  service,  and 
indeed  it  could  scarcely  have  been  so.  For  the  elder 
of  the  synagogue  was  only  a  presiding  officer,  and  by 
virtue  of  his  office  did  neither  sing  nor  read  nor 
preach  nor  pray.  If  the  Christian  minister  does 
neither  of  these  things,  but  only  presides,  we  might 
have  an  argument  that  the  term  elder  or  presbyter 
was  borrowed  from  the  synagogue.  The  title  seems 
like  those  of  others,  of  Apostles  (/'.  e.,  one  sent),  of 
deacon  (i.  e.,  a  servant),  taken  from  Christ.  It  seem- 
ingly came  about  or  rather  was  ordered  by  God  in 
this  wise.  God  under  the  old  covenant  claimed  the 
first-born  or  elder  son  for  His  service,  but  accepted, 
in  lieu  thereof,  the  Levites  to  serve  in  the  sanctuary. 
But  when  Christ  came  —  the  true  first-born  and  elder, 


1 82          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

and  so  the  true  priest  —  the  substituted  and  tempo- 
rary passed  away.  Then  this  order  of  the  gospel 
ministry  took  a  title  which  asserted  its  right  to  priest- 
hood and  united  it  to  Christ  our  "  elder  Brother."  The 
second  order  of  the  Christian  priesthood  bore  thus 
the  title  of  elder  or  presbyter. 

Finally  a  third  order  was  developed.  S.  Paul  finds 
it  necessary  to  have  what  might  be  called  an  Apostolic 
delegate,  one  who  should  have  charge  over  the  pres- 
byters and  deacons  in  a  special  locality,  and  so  Timo- 
thy and  Titus  are  placed  at  Ephesus  and  Crete,  and 
have  power  to  ordain.  Subsequently  we  find  local 
presiding  officers,  called  "  angels,"  held  responsible 
for  their  respective  churches.  Later  in  Asia  Minor 
the  three  orders  are  perfected  under  the  oversight  of 
S.  John.  The  epistles  of  S.  Ignatius  bear  ample 
evidence  to  the  fact  that  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons 
are  recognized  orders  in  the  first  century.  At  Jeru- 
salem there  was  from  the  first  the  local  Apostle  S. 
James,  with  his  presbyters  and  deacon  helpers,  and 
the  Church,  as  it  grew,  naturally  developed  in  con- 
formity to  the  type  given  in  the  Mother  Church.1 
The  progress  was  somewhat  slower  in  certain  locali- 

1  The  weight  of  authority  seems  to  be  that  S.  James,  the  Lord's 
cousin,  was  one  of  the  original  Twelve.  If  he  was  not  and  our 
Lord's  appearance  to  him  was  to  manifest  His  choice  and  qualify 
S.  James  to  be  a  witness  to  the  resurrection,  then  the  Apostles 
would  not  have  been  in  doubt  as  to  who  was  to  fill  the  vacancy  in 
their  number,  and  S.  James  and  not  S.  Matthias  would  have  been 
chosen.  After  Pentecost  the  Apostles  did  not  venture  to  extend 
their  order,  and  were  only  pressed  into  acceptance  of  Paul  and 
Barnabas,  by  special  revelations  and  commands  of  Christ  and  the 
Holy  Ghost.  As  no  such  authorization  is  recorded  of  S.  James  the 
safest  inference  is  that  he  was  one  of  the  Twelve. 


THE  CHRISTIAN   MINISTRY          183 

ties,  like  Rome  and  Alexandria,  but  finally  becomes 
universal. 

Let  us  recapitulate :  The  two  groups,  viz.,  the 
Twelve  Apostles  representing  Christ,  and  the  proph- 
ets, as  the  ministers  of  the  Spirit,  fulfilled  their 
special  functions.  The  prophets  bore  witness  to  the 
indwelling  presence  and  guiding  power  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.  The  Twelve  bore  witness  to  Christ's  resur- 
rection, opened  the  kingdom  to  Jew  and  Gentile, 
and  laid  the  foundations.  Having  done  their  work, 
the  two  as  special  groups  pass.  The  temporary  and 
special  are,  however,  succeeded  by  the  ordinary  and 
permanent.  The  prophetical  gifts  of  the  Spirit  abide, 
divided  to  each  as  the  Spirit  wills  and  are  ministered 
as  the  Church  has  need  in  various  ways.  The  original 
Apostolate,  the  official  representative  of  Christ,  unfolds 
itself  in  the  three  orders  of  bishops,  priests,  and  dea- 
cons, and  so  the  formation  of  the  Christian  ministry 
is  complete. 

There  remains  two  questions  of  some  interest.  In 
whom  does  the  authority  of  ordination  reside,  and 
how  is  it  transmitted?  In  the  Scriptures  we  find 
S.  Paul  and  S.  Barnabas  ordaining  elders,  and  direc- 
tions given  to  S.  Timothy  whom  to  ordain,  and  "  to 
lay  hands  suddenly  on  no  man."  We  do  not  find  any 
ordination  recorded  apart  from  the  episcopate.  The 
presbyters  lay  on  hands.  The  ordination  is  with  the 
laying  on  of  hands  of  the  presbytery  but  by  or  through 
the  Apostle.1  The  common  testimony  as  to  the 
Church's  custom  confined  the  power  to  the  epis- 
copal office.  The  case  at  Alexandria,  where  S.  Jerome 
i  2  Tim.  i.  6. 


1 84         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

said  the  presbyters  elected  one  of  their  number,  might 
not  mean  that  the  one  so  chosen  was  not  subsequently 
consecrated,  as  he  asks,  "  For  what  except  ordination 
does  a  bishop  do  which  a  presbyter  does  not?" 
Without  reference  to  any  other  case  we  know  that  a 
council  at  Alexandria,  A.D.  324,  declared  null  and 
void  an  ordination  by  a  presbyter  only.  Possibly,  as 
has  been  suggested,  there  were  so-called  presbyters 
at  Alexandria  who  had  received  at  their  ordination 
episcopal  authority.  The  consentient  voice  of  the 
Church,  enforced  by  the  undisturbed  practice  of  fifteen 
centuries,  has  been  that  the  power  of  ordination  lies 
with  the  episcopate. 

And  how  is  it  bestowed?  All  authority  of  the 
three  offices  is  with  our  Lord.  Christ  gathered  the 
Apostles  into  union  with  Himself,  made  them  share 
in  His  Messianic  offices  and  the  Holy  Ghost  em- 
powered them.  The  Apostolic  order  represented  by 
the  bishops,  by  prayer  and  laying  on  of  hands,  gathers 
persons  in  different  degrees  of  participation  into  fel- 
lowship with  itself  and  so  with  Christ.  By  this  in- 
gathering they  receive  from  Christ  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  for  the  work  of  their  ministry  and  grace 
for  its  due  exercise.  The  Episcopate,  into  whose 
fellowship  they  are  received,  is  of  the  nature  of  a 
permanent  instrumentality.  Its  members  change  as 
the  years  pass,  just  as  the  atoms  of  the  wave  sweep- 
ing to  the  shore  change  while  the  wave  yet  retains 
its  form.  So  the  Episcopal  order  abides  from  age 
to  age,  a  living  potential  agency.  And  each  new 
bishop  is  by  his  consecration  brought  into  union 
with  Christ  and  His  offices,  not  by  a  grace  which 


THE   CHRISTIAN   MINISTRY          185 

has  percolated  through  twenty  centuries,  as  water 
in  some  Italian  garden  descends  from  fountain  to 
fountain,  but  by  an  instrumentality  as  proximate  as 
brought  the  Holy  Ghost  to  Paul  and  Barnabas  at 
Antioch,  or  the  gift  and  grace  of  order  to  Timothy 
by  the  hands  of  S.  Paul. 

We  may  now  ask  what  are  the  powers  of  the  Chris- 
tian minister?  Is  he  of  the  second  order  a  priest? 
Does  the  word  "priest"  in  our  prayer-book  have  a 
"  sacerdotal  "  meaning?  Is  it  used  there  as  more  than 
an  abbreviated  form  of  the  title  "  presbyter,"  synony- 
mous with  the  officer  of  the  synagogue?  Is  it  not 
true  that  the  title  "  priest "  in  the  Old  Testament  sense 
is  not  used  in  the  word  of  God  to  designate  the  Chris- 
tian ministry? 

The  answer  is,  it  is  not  true  that  the  word  priest 
is  not  applied  in  the  Bible  to  the  Christian  ministry. 
For  in  Isaiah  we  read  "  that  in  the  day  that  God  will 
gather  all  nations,  He  will  take  of  them  for  priests." 
In  the  new  dispensation  the  old  title  was  at  first 
avoided  lest  the  new,  higher,  spiritual  priesthood 
should  be  confounded  with  the  lower  Jewish  one. 
The  Church  has  shown  what  she  means  by  the  title 
presbyter  by  giving  to  its  contraction  "  priest "  the 
synonym  of  sacerdos.  Our  own  branch  of  the  Cath- 
olic Church  has  done  so  likewise  by  the  Latin  title 
of  her  Twenty-third  Article,  where  she  uses  this  word 
and  calls  the  priests  "  sacerdotes."  The  American 
prayer-book  also  speaks  of  the  connection  between  the 
rector  and  his  people  as  a  "  sacerdotal  relation." 

The  real  test,  however,  whether  the  Christian  min- 
ister is  a  priest  or  not,  will  be  found  in  the  powers 


186          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

that  are  given  in  Holy  Scripture.  For  it  is  true  now, 
as  in  the  time  of  Socrates,  "  that  things  must  be  learned 
not  from  their  names  but  from  themselves."  Has, 
then,  the  Christian  presbyter  the  powers  which  dis- 
tinguish the  Jewish  priest?  The  answer  is,  he  has, 
only  in  a  higher  degree.  Did  the  Jewish  priest  give 
torah,  or  judgment?  was  he  a  directing  priest?  did 
the  people  seek  the  law  at  his  mouth?  did  he  exercise 
ecclesiastical  rule?  Of  the  Christian  priest  it  is  said, 
"  Whosoever  heareth  you,  heareth  me,  and  whatsoever 
ye  shall  bind  on  earth  shall  be  bound  in  heaven,  and 
whatsoever  ye  shall  loose  on  earth  shall  be  loosed  in 
heaven."  Had  the  Jewish  priest  the  power  of  rec- 
onciliation or  excommunication?  To  the  Christian 
priesthood  was  given  the  ministry  of  reconciliation, 
that  "  whose  soever  sins  ye  remit,  they  are  remitted ; 
and  whose  soever  sins  ye  retain,  they  are  retained." 
Did  the  Jewish  priest  offer  incense  unto  the  Lord? 
For  the  Christian  service  it  is  written,  "  in  every  place 
incense  shall  be  offered  to  my  name  and  a  pure  offer- 
ing." Did  the  Jewish  priest  once  stand  with  his  censer 
between  the  living  and  the  dead  and  stay  the  plague  ? 
To  the  Christian  it  is  said,  "  Is  any  sick  among  you  ? 
Let  him  call  for  the  elders  of  the  Church  and  let  them 
pray  over  him,  anointing  him  with  oil  in  the  name  of 
the  Lord ;  and  the  prayer  of  faith  shall  save  the  sick." 
Was  the  Jewish  priest  to  bless  in  Jehovah's  name?  It 
is  of  the  Christian  priest's  office  to  say  "  peace  to  this 
house,"  and  to  bless  in  the  holy  threefold  name  of 
God.  Was  the  Jewish  priest  to  offer  sacrifice  ?  This 
is  the  work,  too,  of  the  Christian  priest.  "  We  have 
an  altar,"  and  there  he  makes  and  offers  before  God 


THE   CHRISTIAN   MINISTRY  187 

the  memorial  sacrifice  of  Christ's  body  and  blood. 
"  Ministering  in  sacrifice,"  as  S.  Paul  says,  "  the 
Gospel  of  God,  that  the  offering  up  of  the  Gentiles 
might  be  made  acceptable,  being  sanctified  by  the 
Holy  Ghost."  l 

We  have  thus  seen  that  sacrifice  is  the  essence  of 
religion  and  priesthood  is  a  necessity  of  it.  Against 
this  conception  the  world  raises  its  insidious  cry  of 
sacerdotalism.  It  hates,  as  the  great  Liddon  said, 
anything  that  seems  to  assert  aught  of  inequality  be- 
tween man  and  man.  Forgetting  the  fact  that  in 
God's  providential  government  there  are  priests  of 
knowledge,  priests  of  wealth,  priests  of  political  power, 
priests  in  every  department  of  the  social  order,  it 
rebels  against  any  distinction  of  class  in  religion. 
Sectarianism,  ignorant  of  the  Church's  doctrine,  that 
the  Church  is  a  body  of  priests,  and  that  her  officers 
are  not  different  in  kind  from  the  laity  but  only  in 
the  degree  of  powers  they  possess,  cries  out  against 
her  in  like  reproachful  spirit.  Devout  but  mistaken 
Christian  churchmen,  rightly  jealous  of  Christ's  unique 
high  priesthood,  cry  out  against  any  priesthood  as 
coming  between  themselves  and  God,  forgetting  that 
the  priest  at  the  altar  no  more  does  this  than  the 
preacher  in  the  pulpit.  Both  are  but  His  represent- 
atives and  agents,  claiming  naught  as  their  own, 
seeking  naught  for  themselves,  but  working  as  the 
Church's  servants  for  the  Master's  sake.  When  true 
to  its  calling  priesthood  is  not  to  be  feared,  but  loved 
and  honored  as  one  of  God's  best  gifts  to  man.2 

1  Rom.  xv.  16.  3  Un.  Ser.  Sacerdotalism. 


CHAPTER   XI 

ANGLICAN   ORDERS 

OUR  Lord  established  a  ministry  which  would 
be  an  extension  of  His  own,  and  through 
which  He  would  act.  It  would  extend  His  own 
prophetical,  priestly,  and  kingly  offices  and  their 
benefits  to  mankind.  By  its  means  He  would  con- 
tinue in  the  world  going  about  doing  good.  His 
ministers  as  His  authorized  agents,  by  their  official 
acts  of  consecration,  blessing,  and  pardon,  bind  Him. 
Whom  they  bless,  He  blesses;  whom  they  in  His 
name  forgive,  He  forgives ;  on  whom  they  lay  hands, 
He  lays  His  hands;  what  they  confirm,  He  confirms; 
what  they  consecrate,  He  consecrates;  whom  they 
join  in  holy  matrimony,  He  joins  together  in  Him- 
self. Of  all  the  loving  gifts  of  the  Incarnate  God  to 
His  people,  that  of  the  priesthood  is  the  most  signal 
token  of  His  providential  care.  Therefore,  Christ's 
loyal  children  have  ever  felt  it  an  honor  to  care  for 
those  set  over  them  in  the  Lord,  and  esteem  them 
very  highly  for  the  Lord's  sake. 

From  its  earliest  formation  the  Anglican  Church 
has  always  been  in  possession  of  this  Christ-founded 
and  Apostolic  ministry.  It  was  coeval  with  its  ear- 
liest beginnings.  It  continued  throughout  the  British- 
Saxon-Norman  times.  Its  continuity  was  not  broken 
at  the  Reformation.  The  reformers  officially  declared, 


ANGLICAN   ORDERS  189 

and   made  it  a   part   of  the   prayer-book,  that   the 
ancient  orders  were  to  be  "  continued."     It  has  been  *•     h  |S 
securely  guarded   by   canon  law   and   an   orthodox  u>*£*  oJ 
liturgy.     It  has  extended  under  the  divine  blessing  ItuT 
throughout   the   world.     The   loyal  children   of  the 
Church  do  not  need  to  be  convinced  concerning  it.  ITU/JL  ' 
Its  priests  know,  by  its  results,  that  they  possess  the  f*«<xc  * 
gift  of  sacred  orders.     The  laity  ask  for  no  further)"^ 
proofs  than  their  own  experience  of  their  possession  L 
of  true  and  effective  sacraments.     It  is  immaterial  to  ^ 
them  what  those  without  their  communion  may  say  \ 


or  think.  They  know  in  whom  they  believe.  They  _ 
know  with  the  divine  certainty  what  they  possess.  S^L2&! 
The  proof  vouchsafed  them  is  of  the  double  kind  of 
interior  verification  by  God's  Holy  Spirit,  and  by  the 
outward  historical  and  theological  evidence.  No 
more  certain  truth  is  there  in  the  sphere  of  revealed 
religion.  No  better  evidence,  indeed,  is  there  for  the 
existence  of  God  Himself  than,  believing  in  Him,  ex- 
ists for  the  validity  of  Anglican  orders. 

We  do,  however,  meet  with  those  who,  if  they  do 
not  deny,  at  least  question  them.  They  are  divided 
in  England  into  the  two  classes  of  non-Conformists, 
Sectarians  and  Roman  Catholics.  The  reasons,  when 
given  by  the  first,  seem  based  largely  on  ignorance, 
the  second  on  technicalities  and  policy.  We  must 
meet  both  with  fairness,  sympathy,  and  charity.  For 
only  by  such  a  spirit  can  Christ's  honor  and  the 
true  interests  of  His  kingdom  be  served. 

First,  as  to  the  sectarians.  We  must  recognize 
that  all  duly  baptized  are  united  to  Christ,  and  extend 
our  love  to  all  Christians  by  whatever  name  they  call 


I9o          CHRISTIAN   AND    CATHOLIC 

themselves.  Their  spiritual  ancestors  in  England 
went  out  from  the  Mother  Church,  and  they  have 
inherited  the  results  of  the  schism.  The  devout 
among  them  have  found  Christ  and  feel  assured  of 
their  acceptance  in  Him.  In  their  walk  with  the 
Lord  they  have  found  Him  precious  to  their  souls. 
So  rich  is  the  Gospel  as  they  possess  it,  that  it  is 
difficult  for  them  to  realize  there  is  a  fuller  spiritual 
life  vouchsafed  through  participation  of  the  sacra- 
ments of  the  Catholic  Church.  They  do  not  see 
this  spiritual  result  in  the  many  worldly  and  indiffer- 
ent churchmen,  and  so  conclude  that  it  is  not  to  be 
found  in  the  Church.  God  in  His  dear  love  is,  how- 
ever, drawing  souls  desirous  of  a  closer  union  with 
Himself  into  the  fuller  embrace  of  those  sacramental 
gifts  which  the  Church  alone  can  give. 

But  the  sectarian  is  so  strongly  entrenched  in  his 
belief  that  he  is  ordinarily  unwilling  to  even  consider 
the  Church's  claims.  If  he  argues  at  all  he  brings  up 
Chillingworth's  argument  about  the  uncertainty  of 
the  transmission  of  orders.  His  argument,  however, 
of  the  improbability  of  preserving  a  succession 
through  so  many  ages  without  -flaw  applies  to  that 
Roman  doctrine  which  makes  the  validity  of  a  sacra- 
ment depend  upon  the  personal  intention  of  the 
priest.  But  it  does  not  apply  to  the  transmission 
of  a  divine  commission  according  to  the  canon  law 
of  the  Church,  which  requires  three  bishops  to  act  in 
conferring  it ;  and  the  validity  of  whose  action  does 
not  depend  upon  their  personal  belief,  but  on  their 
official  character  as  agents  of  the  Church.  And  as 
concerning  the  effect  of  such  an  orderly  and  regular 


ANGLICAN   ORDERS  191 

transmission  from  Apostolic  times,  "  there  is,"  says 
Bishop  Stillingfleet,  "  as  great  reason  to  believe  the 
Apostolic  succession  to  be  of  divine  institution,  as 
the  canon  of  Holy  Scripture  or  the  observance  of 
the  Lord's  Day." 

But,  our  inquirer  asks,  is  it  probable  that  God 
would  entrust  such  a  gift  to  unholy  and  unbelieving 
persons  as  some  of  the  alleged  transmitters  certainly 
have  been?  It  would,  however,  be  more  improbable 
if,  in  so  important  a  matter,  God  should  not  have  left 
a  regular  and  appointed  method  of  transmission. 
We  have  indeed  this  treasure  in  earthen  vessels,  but 
the  unholiness  of  the  channel  does  not  hinder  the 
conveyance  of  the  gift  The  neglect  or  even  denial 
of  their  powers  would  not  disrobe  the  priests  of  their 
sacred  character.  "We  do  not  become  a  mere  crea- 
ture of  man  though  we  sell  ourselves  to  be  his  slave." 
"  Even  if  a  bishop,"  wrote  Newman,  "  were  to  use  the 
words,  '  receive  ye  the  Holy  Ghost  '  with  little  or  no 
meaning,  or  a  priest  the  consecrating  words  in  the 
Eucharist,  considering  it  only  a  commemoration  of 
Christ's  death,  or  a  deacon  the  water  and  words  of 
baptism,  denying  in  his  heart  that  it  is  regeneration, 
yet  they  may  in  spite  of  their  unbelief  be  instruments 
of  a  power  they  know  not  of,  and  '  speak  not  of 
themselves  '  -  —  they  may  be  as  Balaam  or  as  Isaac." 

Probably  the  argument  which  in  their  hearts  most 
affects  sectarians  is  the  logical  outcome  of  the  Apos- 
tolic succession  in  application  to  their  own  ministry. 
If  the  doctrine  is  true,  are  not  their  ministers  without 
authority  to  officiate  in  Christ's  name  ?  They  know 
and  love  them.  They  have  been  helped  by  their 


192          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

ministrations.  They  see  how  God  has  blessed  their 
efforts.  They  take  an  honest  pride  in  the  growth 
and  power  of  their  denomination.  They  are  linked 
to  it  by  Christian  friendships  and  many  social  ties. 
They  cannot  think,  whatever  is  urged,  that  their  work 
is  not  of  God  and  dear  to  Him.  Such  a  view  and 
feeling  is  highly  commendable.  Christians  ought  not 
to  deny  whatever  the  Holy  Spirit  may  have  witnessed 
in  their  own  consciousness.  But  a  distinction  is  to 
be  observed.  The  Church  claims  to  have  a  priest- 
hood and  sacrifice  and  sacramental  gifts  of  confirma- 
tion and  absolution.  A  sectarian  does  not  claim  to 
have  a  priesthood  or  sacrifice.  He  does  not  call  his 
ministers  priests.  He  rejects  all  sacerdotal  powers. 
It  is  therefore  no  want  of  liberality  to  deny  to  the 
sectarian  clergy  what  they  themselves  strenuously  re- 
pudiate. We  do  not  deny  that  they  are  Christ's  dis- 
ciples declaring  to  the  best  of  their  knowledge  His 
Gospel,  and  that,  where  sincere,  He  blesses  their  work. 
When,  however,  S.  John  Baptist  had  brought  his 
disciples  to  repentance  and  peace,  they  were  to  leave 
their  old  master,  grateful  for  what  he  had  done  for 
them,  to  receive  the  fuller  gifts  of  a  more  complete 
union  with  Christ.  So  too  Apollos  may  be  an  elo- 
quent man,  mighty  in  the  Scriptures,  instructed  in 
the  way  of  the  Lord,  fervent  in  spirit,  yet  an  Aquila 
and  Priscilla  must  take  him  unto  themselves  and 
expound  unto  him  the  way  of  God  more  perfectly. 
In  like  manner,  humble  and  devout  sectarians  are 
being  led  back  into  their  old  home,  to  find  there  an 
illumination  and  spiritual  gifts,  a  wider  vision  and  a 
deeper  life  than  they  before  possessed. 


ANGLICAN   ORDERS  193 

Let  us  now,  on  the  other  hand,  turn  to  our  Roman 
brethren.  A  great  many  devout  Roman  Catholics, 
both  of  priests  and  laity,  believe  in  their  hearts  in 
the  validity  of  Anglican  orders.  They  have  come  into 
friendly  relations  with  Anglican  priests  and  saintly 
laymen.  They  see  the  same  effects  of  sacramental 
grace  in  them  as  they  see  in  their  own  communion. 
"  By  their  fruits  ye  shall  know  them,"  said  the  Lord, 
and  their  spiritual  discernment  tells  them  that  Angli- 
cans possess  the  sacraments  as  truly  as  themselves. 
A  ruling  of  the  late  Pope,  Leo  XIII.,  restrains  the 
expression  of  their  belief,  which  they  know  to  be  true. 

However,  as  has  been  said  by  Roman  Catholics, 
this  papal  utterance  was  not  of  the  class  to  which 
infallibility  belongs ;  and,  as  it  contains  some  errors 
of  fact,  his  Holiness,  by  those  who  drew  it  up,  was 
obviously  misinformed.  So  it  may  be  in  time  to 
come  that  the  Roman  Church,  whose  head  is  the  first 
bishop  in  Christendom,  may  find  it  to  its  advantage, 
among  the  growing  assaults  of  these  later  times,  to 
reverse,  in  the  interests  of  Christian  union,  its  own 
opinion  in  the  same  manner  as  it  reversed,  concern- 
ing the  conveyance  of  holy  orders,  the  decision  of 
Pope  Eugenius  IV.  We  can  only  say,  with  God  all 
things,  even  this,  is  possible,  and  for  Christ's  sake  and 
Rome's  pray  it  may  come  to  pass. 

I 

If  any  Christians,  however,  with  honest  intent,  make 
inquiry  concerning  our  orders,  it  is  well  to  call  their 
attention  first  to  the  fact  that  the  Anglican  Church 

'3 


194          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

not  only  claims  to  have  them,  but  acts  as  if  she  had. 
While  she  holds  that  there  are  two  sacraments 
universally  necessary  for  salvation,  she  does  not  deny 
there  are  others.  She  regards  holy  orders  as  the 
ordained  means  of  communicating  authority  and 
grace  for  the  work  of  the  ministry.  In  one  of  her 
homilies  she  calls  it  by  the  term  sacrament.  It  is 
placed  in  this  category  by  her  ablest  theologians.  It 
is  the  more  commonly  accepted  belief  in  the  Church 
that  the  character  conferred  by  the  sacrament  is  in- 
delible. Once  a  bishop  or  priest,  always  a  bishop 
or  priest. 

Again,  she  has  also  preserved  carefully  the  dis- 
tinctions between  the  three  inherited  orders.  A  dea- 
con is  the  assistant  only  at  the  Holy  Eucharist.  He 
may  baptize  infants  in  the  absence  of  the  priest, 
and  so  bring  them  into  the  kingdom.  The  priest 
alone  can  consecrate  and  offer  the  holy  sacrifice. 
It  is  he  who  ministers  the  word  of  reconciliation 
in  the  absolving  of  penitents.  The  bishop  alone 
is  possessed  of  the  power  of  ordination.  According 
to  Catholic  usage  he  alone  confirms,  either  doing  so 
in  person  or  by  consecrating  the  chrism  used  for  that 
purpose.  He  is  the  source  of  diocesan  jurisdiction. 
He  exercises  rule  and  authority.  By  thus  preserving 
intact  the  distinctive  powers  of  each  of  the  three 
orders  the  Anglican  Church  officially  declares  her 
belief  in  them. 

She  holds  also  to  the  Apostolic  succession  pre- 
served through  episcopal  ordination.  In  the  Ameri- 
can prayer-book,  in  the  office  of  institution,  she  thus 
makes  prayer  for  the  instituted  priest:  "O  Holy 


ANGLICAN   ORDERS  195 

Jesus,  who  hast  purchased  to  Thyself  an  universal 
Church,  and  hast  promised  to  be  with  the  ministers 
of  Apostolic  succession  to  the  end  of  the  world  :  Be 
graciously  pleased  to  bless  the  ministry  and  service 
of  him  who  is  now  appointed  to  offer  sacrifices  of 
prayer  and  praise  to  Thee  in  this  house." 

Again,  she  regards  the  word  "presbyter"  as  syn- 
onymous with  priest,  and  gives  in  her  Articles  the  title 
of  "  Sacerdotes  "  to  the  ministers  of  the  second  order. 
In  the  office  of  institution  in  her  prayer-book  the 
bishop  grants  to  the  instituted  minister  authority  for 
the  performance  of  "  every  act  of  sacerdotal  func- 
tion among  the  people."  The  American  prayer-book 
describes  the  relation  between  the  people  and  the 
clergy  as  a  "  sacerdotal  relation."  The  priest  praises 
God  as  one  who  has  been  honored  "  to  stand  in  Thy 
house  and  to  serve  at  Thy  holy  altar." 

Moreover,  the  Church  regards  the  priest  as  an 
offerer  of  sacrifice.  When  he  stands  before  the  altar 
he  solemnly  offers  the  holy  and  consecrated  gifts  of 
Christ's  body  and  blood  to  the  Almighty  Father.  Ad- 
dressing Him,  he  uses  the  liturgical  words,  "  We,  thy 
humble  servants,  do  celebrate  and  make  here  before 
thy  Divine  Majesty,  with  these  thy  holy  gifts,  which  we 
now  offer  unto  Thee,  the  memorial  Jesus  commanded 
us  to  make."  The  sacerdotal  character  is  thus 
stamped  upon  her  priests  and  all  their  ministrations. 

The  Church's  belief  in  holy  order  as  a  sacrament,, 
conveying  character  and  grace,  is  also  marked  in 
another  way,  for  none  but  those  episcopally  ordained 
can  minister  at  her  altars.  If  a  Roman  priest  is  led 
to  unite  himself  with  her  the  Church  does  not  again 


196          CHRISTIAN   AND    CATHOLIC 

ordain  him,  for  he  is  already  a  priest.  If,  on  the 
other  hand,  a  sectarian  minister  is  brought  into  the 
Church,  no  matter  how  learned  he  may  be,  or  what- 
ever his  attainments,  the  Church  requires  that  he 
must  be  confirmed  and  then  ordained  as  if  he  were 
a  mere  layman.  He  must  be  made  first  a  deacon, 
and  then  in  due  time  elevated  to  the  priesthood. 
Now  this  attitude  of  the  Church  in  respect  to  non- 
conformists can  only  be  justified  on  the  ground  of 
the  Church's  belief  in  the  necessity  of  episcopal 
ordination  and  the  sacrament  of  order.  For  if  the 
sectarian  ministers  are  as  fully  and  validly  representa- 
tives of  Christ  as  we  are,  then  the  Church  is  guilty  of 
a  great  wrong,  indeed  of  the  sin  of  schism,  in  making 
what  is  not  in  itself  essential  a  matter  of  division. 

Nor  finally  must  it  be  overlooked  that  beside  her 
prayer-book  in  America  she  has  an  official  hymn 
book.  The  devotions  of  Anglicans  are  not  confined 
as  they  are  in  the  Eastern  Church  to  their  formal 
liturgy.  To  understand  the  spirit  of  the  Anglican 
Church  one  must  study  the  hymns  of  her  people. 
They  are  their  devotional  life.  Our  collects  may 
seem  cold  in  comparison  with  the  East,  but  the  spirit 
of  devotion  breaks  forth  in  our  hymns.  In  them 
we  find  the  Church  entreating  the  Holy  Spirit  to 
make  the  ordained  "  a  holy  priesthood "  ;  she  prays 
that  they  may  present  and  spread  forth  to  God 

"  That  only  offering  perfect  in  Thine  eyes, 
The  one  true,  pure,  immortal  Sacrifice," 

and  that  in  the  Holy  Eucharist  we  may  receive 

"The  Bread  that  is  Christ's  Flesh  — for  food, 
The  Wine  that  is  the  Saviour's  Blood." 


ANGLICAN   ORDERS  197 

So  by  her  action,  her  liturgy,  her  hymns,  the  teach- 
ing of  her  theologians,  the  manifestations  of  her 
spiritual  life,  the  Church  bears  witness  to  her  posses- 
sion of  the  sacrament  of  holy  order.  However  in 
evil  times  the  sense  of  the  priestly  character  may 
have  decayed,  her  priests  since  the  Reformation  have 
never  sunk  in  morals  like  those  of  the  Roman  com- 
munion in  Mexico,  Brazil,  or  the  Philippines.  There 
has  been  no  such  ignorance  concerning  the  ministra- 
tion of  the  sacraments  or  decadence  of  the  priestly 
character  as  S.  Carlo  Borromeo  found  existing  among 
the  clergy  when  he  became  Bishop  of  Milan.  When 
at  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  so  many  of  the 
French  priests,  with  bishops,  became  apostates,  the 
clergy  of  England  in  that  era  of  unbelief  remained 
faithful  to  Christ.  The  Church  of  England  knows 
she  possesses  holy  orders,  and  the  lives  of  her  sons 
and  clergy  declare  it. 

II 

Our  inquirer  may  ask,  how  have  the  orders  been 
preserved  and  transmitted?  Was  there  an  interrup- 
tion at  the  time  of  the  Reformation?  Through  whom 
do  the  present  bishops  trace  their  descent? 

An  easy  way  of  giving  answer  is  to  say  that  all  the 
living  Anglican  bishops  trace  their  succession  toj 
the  pre-Reformation  ones  and  so  through  them  up 
to  the  Apostles,  through  Archbishop  Laud.  By  re- 
membering this  fact  the  question  of  the  Anglican 
succession  is  much  simplified.  For  Archbishop 
Laud  united  in  himself  three  separate  and  distinct 
lines  of  consecrators.  These  were  the  Irish  line,  the 


198          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

Italian  line,  and  the  English  line,  any  one  of  which 
being  good,  and  there  is  no  doubt  about  any  one, 
Laud  was  validly  consecrated  bishop. 

Concerning  the  Irish  line,  it  combined  in  its  de- 
scent the  old  Celtic  line,  also  the  Roman  line,  to 
which  resort  was  frequently  made,  and  in  pre-Refor- 
mation  times  and  during  the  reign  of  Queen  Mary 
the  English  line. 

It  is  too  often  overlooked  that  under  Queen 
Elizabeth  but  two  of  the  Irish  bishops  were  deposed, 
Leverous,  of  Kildare,  and  Walsh,  of  Meath,  for  refus- 
ing to  take  the  oath  of  supremacy.  Most  if  not 
all  of  the  others  who  had  been  bishops  during  the 
previous  Roman  Catholic  period  of  Queen  Mary 
conformed.  Among  them  was  Hugh  Kirwan,  Arch- 
bishop of  Dublin,  who  had  been  consecrated  by 
Bonner,  Thirlby,  and  Griffin  during  Queen  Mary's 
reign  and  according  to  the  Roman  pontifical.  Some 
of  these  conforming  Irish  bishops  were  transferred 
in  Elizabeth's  time  and  later  to  English  sees. 
Through  three  of  his  consecrators,  —  John  Thorn- 
borough,  of  Worcester,  John  Housen, of  Oxford  (one  of 
whose  consecrators  had  the  Irish  succession  through 
Christopher  Hampton,  Archbishop  of  Armagh),  and 
Theophilus  Field,  Bishop  of  Landaff,  one  of  whose 
consecrators  was  George,  Bishop  of  Derry,  —  Laud 
derived  his  succession. 

The  conveyance  of  orders  through  the  Italian  line  is 
also  a  matter  of  historical  interest.  M.  A.  Spalatro, 
or  Marco  Antonio  de  Dominis  (consecrated  Bishop  of 
Segna  in  1600,  and  translated  to  Spalatro  on  the  east 
shore  of  the  Adriatic,  in  1602)  conformed  to  the 


ANGLICAN   ORDERS  199 

English  Church.  He  was  a  Roman  Catholic  arch- 
bishop. On  uniting  with  the  Church  in  England  he 
was  made  Dean  of  Windsor.  He  was  a  co-conse- 
crator,  in  1617,  of  George  Montaigne,  Bishop  of  Lon- 
don, and  Nicholas  Felton,  Bishop  of  Ely.  When 
Laud  was  consecrated  on  the  i8th  of  November, 
1621,  as  Bishop  of  St.  David's,  amongst  his  co- 
consecrators  were  Bishop  Montaigne  and  Bishop 
Felton. 

Laud  also  derived  his  succession  through  the  Eng- 
lish line.  When  Queen  Elizabeth  came  to  the  throne 
in  1559,  Cardinal  Pole,  who  was  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  had  died.  He  passed  away  a  few  hours 
after  Queen  Mary's  death.  The  see  of  Canter- 
bury had  thus  become  vacant.  Nominations  and 
elections  to  the  see  were  made  in  legal  manner. 
The  form  of  confirmation  followed  that  was  used 
in  Bishop  Chicheley's  case  in  the  fifteenth  century. 
On  the  I7th  of  December,  1559,  Dr.  Mathew  Parker 
was  consecrated  Archbishop  at  Lambeth.  The  offi- 
cial original  record  is  preserved  there.  A  fac-simile 
(a  photo-zincograph  copy)  has  been  made  and 
officially  witnessed,  and  was  published  by  Parker  and 
Company  in  1870. 

Roman  Catholic  historians  like  Dr.  Lingard  and 
theologians  like  Canon  Eastcourt  have  admitted  the 
fact  of  the  consecration.  They  have  retreated  from 
the  former  position  taken  by  Roman  writers  and 
apologized  for  it.  Father  Brandi,  S.  J.,  in  "  A  Last 
Word,"  says,  "  One  cannot  be  held  responsible  for 
what  may  be  written  on  this  or  any  other  subject  by 
incompetent  writers,  but  for  a  long  time  past  no 


200          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

(English  Catholic  writer  of  any  standing  has  used  the 

1  Nag's  Head  story  as  an  argument."1 

"  With  regard  to  Parker's  consecration,"  says  Canon 
Eastcourt  (R.  C.),  "  as  an  historical  fact  it  is  most 
certain  that  it  took  place  on  the  i/th  of  December, 
1559,  according  to  the  description  in  the  register."2 

It  may  be  added  that  Dr.  Cyriacus,  a  learned  Or- 
thodox Greek  ecclesiastical  historian,  freely  admits 
Parker's  consecration,  of  which  he  has  no  doubt.3 

In  the  words  of  Dr.  Dollinger,  spoken  at  the  Bonn 
Conference,  in  1875,  "The  fact  that  Parker  was  con- 
secrated by  four  rightly  consecrated  bishops,  rite  et 
legitime,  with  the  imposition  of  hands  and  the  neces- 
sary words,  is  so  well  attested  that  if  one  chooses  to 
doubt  this  fact,  one  could  with  the  same  right  doubt 
ten  thousand  facts ;  "  or  in  the  words  of  Courayer, 
"Everything  concurs  to  set  the  truth  in  so  great  a 
light  that  if  the  fact  of  the  Lambeth  ordination  is 
not  above  all  doubt  one  must  renounce  acknowledg- 
ing anything  certain  in  history." 

Very  touching  is  the  record  of  Archbishop  Parker 
made  in  his  own  private  diary:  "  i/th  of  December, 
1559.  I  was  this  day  consecrated  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury.  Alas!  Alas!  O  Lord  God,  for  what 
times  hast  Thou  reserved  me.  Now  am  I  come  into 
the  deep  waters,  and  the  floods  overflow  me.  O 
Lord,  I  am  in  trouble.  Answer  for  me."  So  incon- 
testable is  the  evidence  for  Parker's  consecration  that 
the  pope  in  a  late  bull  abandoned  all  objections  to  it. 

1  "  A  Last  Word,"  p.  5. 

8  Eastcourt,  "Anglican  Orders,"  p.  371. 

8  Denny,  p.  22. 


ANGLICAN   ORDERS  201 

The  consecration  took  place  with  dignified  cere- 
monial at  Lambeth.  We  read  that  the  chapel  was 
adorned  with  tapestry  and  the  chancel  covered  with 
red  cloth,  the  altar  was  vested  with  a  carpet  or  altar 
cloth.  The  consecration,  which  was  after  the  ordinal 
of  King  Edward  VI.,  took  place  according  to  the 
ancient  custom  after  the  creed.  The  elect  arch- 
bishop entered,  wearing  a  long  scarlet  cassock,  with 
four  torches  borne  before  him.  He  was  accompanied 
by  four  bishops.  The  celebrant  was  vested  in  a  cope  of 
silk.  In  conferring  the  sacred  order  of  the  episcopate 
four  bishops  participated.  Two  of  these,  Barlow,  the 
chief  consecrator,  and  Hodgkins,  had  been  consecrated 
according  to  the  old  Catholic  pontifical.  Bishop 
Barlow's  consecration  is  certified  by  a  great  number 
of  proofs  which  place  it  beyond  any  reasonable 
doubt.1  The  Roman  Catholic  historian  Dr.  Lingard 
admits  it.2  He  was  duly  installed  in  person  as  Bishop 
of  S.  David's,  and  the  mandate  to  install  always  re- 
cites the  fact  of  the  consecration.  He  took  his  seat 
in  the  House  of  Lords,  which  he  could  not  have 
done  but  on  being  presented  by  two  witnesses  to  his 
consecration.  He  was  universally  recognized  as  a 
bishop  in  King  Henry's  time  and  King  Edward's  and 
in  legal  documents  by  Queen  Mary.  His  saying 
that  the  king's  appointment  would  make  a  layman  as 
good  a  bishop  as  himself  would  be  meaningless  if  he 
were  not  a  duly  consecrated  bishop.  There  is  no 
reasonable  doubt  but  that  Barlow  was  a  duly  conse- 
crated bishop,  and  consequently  Archbishop  Parker. 

1  "  Anglican  Orders,"  Denny,  S.  P.  C.  K.,  49-73. 

2  Lingard,  "  Hist.  Eng.,"  vi.,  p.  329. 


202          CHRISTIAN   AND    CATHOLIC 

We  must,  however,  notice  that  one  departure  tool? 
place  from  the  ordinary  method.  It  is  of  record 
that  all  four  bishops,  when  they  laid  on  hands,  pro- 
nounced the  formula,  "  Receive  the  Holy  Ghost,"  etc. 
The  occasion  was  a  peculiar  one  and  they  felt  the  im- 
portance of  most  carefully  guarding  the  transmission 
of  the  gift  and  grace  of  holy  order.  They  thus 
departed  from  the  customary  way  of  the  chief  con- 
secrator  alone  using  the  words.  By  each  of  them 
uttering  the  formula,  each  acted  as  a  consecrator,  so 
that  if  any  one  of  them  was  a  validly  consecrated 
bishop  the  gift  of  orders  would  be  conveyed.  The 
Roman  Catholic  Martene  declared  that  the  bishops 
assisting  in  the  laying  on  of  hands  are  "  not  merely 
witnesses,  but  co-operators."  The  Eastern  Church 
holds  that  as  many  bishops  as  are  present  and  act 
do  consecrate.  It  can  therefore  be  no  matter  of 
doubt  that  Matthew  Parker  was  solemnly  set  apart  and 
consecrated  as  bishop  in  the  Church  of  God. 

We  can  but  note  the  contrast  of  this  consecration 
with  that  of  Dr.  Carroll,  who  was  consecrated  in 
1790  as  the  first  Roman  bishop  for  the  United 
States,  and  upon  the  validity  of  whose  consecration 
that  of  the  Roman  hierarchy  in  America  for  half  a 
century  depended.  He  was  consecrated  in  the 
private  chapel  of  Lullworth  Castle,  and  contrary  to 
the  ancient  canons,  by  one  bishop  only,  and  he  a 
bishop  only  in  partibus,  having  no  lawful  jurisdiction 
in  England  and  assisted,  so  the  records  say,  by  two 
priests! 

Thus  the  preeminent  caution  taken  in  the  conse- 
cration of  Archbishop  Parker  bears  witness  to  the 


ANGLICAN   ORDERS  203 

Anglican  Church's  care  in  the  transmission  of  holy 
orders.  The  fact  of  his  consecration  is  now,  by  the 
admission  of  opponents,  beyond  dispute. 


Ill 

Let  us  next  consider  the  ordinal. 

In  the  opinion  of  a  late  pope  the  validity  of  the  O  \f  ill 
Edvvardine  formula  was  denied.  Like  one  of  the  "*" 
English  privy  council  decisions  it  was  obviously  so 
dictated  by  policy  as  to  be  for  Catholics  without 
weight.  It  could  be  no  more  so  than  preceding 
opinions  of  former  popes  who  have  fallen  into  errors 
respecting  the  orders  of  other  bodies,  or  in  what  the 
essence  of  holy  order  consists.  Thus  we  find  one 
declaring  certain  orders  invalid  which  Rome  now 
in  uniat  churches  accepts,  and  Eugenius  IV.  de- 
claring the  essential  "  matter "  to  be  the  delivery  of 
the  instruments  which  is  an  opinion  now  abandoned. 
Pope  Leo  XIII.  in  turn  contradicted  the  rulings  of 
his  predecessors  Julius  III.  and  also  of  Paul  IV.  The 
former  authorized  Cardinal  Pole  to  grant  dispensations 
touching  "  the  office  of  consecration  which  had  been 
granted  even  by  bishops  who  were  heretics  and  schis- 
matics, or  otherwise  minus  rite  and  without  observ- 
ance of  the  accustomed  form  of  the  Church."  The 
phrase  "accustomed  form"  means  the  customary  full 
ritual,  "minus  rite,"  something  less.  The  cardinal 
accordingly  informed  Parliament  that  he  would 
receive  "  all  who  had  obtained  orders  under  the 
pretended  authority  of  the  supremacy  of  the  Angli- 
can Church  in  the  orders  to  which  they  had  been 


204          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

so   admitted."     Paul  IV.  ratified   the   action  of  his 
predecessor. 

A  question,  however,  had  arisen  whether  the  dis- 
pensation granted  applied  to  certain  Lutheran  and 
Calvinistic  ministers  who  by  the  king's  grant  had 
been  allowed  to  have  churches  of  their  own.  Pope 
Julius  in  his  brief  "  Regimine  universalis"  decided 
who  were  to  be  regarded  as  ordained  and  who  not. 
Those  "  alone  can  be  said  not  to  have  been  ordained, 
rite  et  recte  who  were  not  ordained  and  consecrated 
in  the  form  of  the  Church."  The  phrase  "  form  of 
the  Church  "  means  that  part  of  the  accustomed  form 
which  is  sufficient  to  effect  or  confer  a  sacrament. 
This  had  been  wanting  in  the  cases  above  mentioned. 
There  was  no  competent  consecrator.  But  the  pope 
ruled  "  that  others  on  whom  orders  had  been  con- 
ferred by  bishops  ordained  and  consecrated  in  the 
form  of  the  Church  had  received  the  character  of 
the  orders  conferred  and  lacked  nothing  but  the 
execution  thereof,"  /.  e.,  papal  recognition  and  con- 
sent. It  is  thus  seen  to  be  a  somewhat  difficult  task 
to  reconcile  Pope  Leo's  opinion  with  that  of  his 
predecessors. 

It  is  also  to  be  noticed  that  Leo  fell,  through  the 
way  the  case  was  represented  to  him,  into  a  mistake 
of  fact.  There  was  an  authority  given  by  Pope  Paul 
IV.  to  Cardinal  Pole  to  condone  or  dispense  persons 
who  had  nulliter  et  de  facto  obtained  during  Henry's 
and  Edward's  time  various  grants  concerning  orders 
as  well  as  ecclesiastical  benefices.  As  cited  by  Leo, 
the  word  "  concerning "  was  omitted  and  the  word 
nulliter  was  translated  "null"  and  made  to  refer  to 


ANGLICAN   ORDERS  205 

the  orders.  It  thus  made  the  sentence  convey  the 
idea  that  these  orders  were  declared  null.  But  it 
has  been  shown  that  milliter  in  mediaeval  Latin,  as 
given  by  Ducange  in  his  "  Glossary "  means  "  un- 
justly," "  extra-legally,"  "  illegitimately."  It  was  so 
used  within  a  short  time  in  the  English  ecclesiastical 
courts.  The  meaning,  therefore,  is  that  certain  irreg- 
ularities might  be  dispensed,  but  not  that  the  orders 
were  declared  to  be  invalid.1  These  errors  of  fact 
vacate  the  papal  opinion  of  Leo  of  any  value.  As 
the  members  of  the  great  and  learned  Society  of 
Jesus  have  come  to  disregard  the  condemnation  of 
their  order  by  Pope  Clement,  so  in  time  to  come  they 
may  learn  to  disregard  this  political  one  of  Leo. 

However  all  this  may  be,  the  question  of  Anglican 
orders  is  not  effected  by  any  papal  decision.  It  must 
stand  on  its  own  merits. 

In  respect  of  the  ordinal,  the  Anglican  Church 
provided  that  the  ancient  orders  of  the  priesthood 
should  be  preserved  and  rightly  transmitted.  As  the 
ordinal  was  in  hopeless  confusion,  perplexing  differ- 
ences existing  between  the  Roman  and  the  Sarum 
rites,2  and  no  one  was  able  to  say  with  certainty  at 
what  time  in  the  service  the  priest  was  ordained,3  it 
was  of  the  first  necessity  that  the  ordinal  should  be 
revised.  In  the  Roman  rite  there  are  two  laying 
on  of  hands  by  the  bishop.  One  when  the  words 
"Receive  the  Holy  Ghost"  are  said.  But  this  is 

1  "  Leo  XIII.  and  Paul  IV.,"  pub.  Parker  &  Co.  Lacey's  Supple- 
mentum  to  De  Hierarchia  Anglicana.  Dr.  J.  Fulton's  "  Examination 
of  Leo  XIII.  Bull,"  Apostolicte  Cura,  pp.  15-20. 

8  B.  Smith,  "  Ordinal,  Past  and  Present,"  p.  70. 

•  Mortimer,  "  Catholic  Faith  and  Practice,"  Vol.  ii.,  103. 


206          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

said  after  the  ordination ;  for  the  ordained  has  been 
acting  as  a  co-consecrator  of  the  Holy  Eucharist  with 
the  bishop,  which  unless  ordained  he  could  not  do. 
The  other  laying  on  of  hands  is  at  the  beginning  of 
the  service,  when  the  hands  of  the  bishop  are  laid 
on,  but  nothing  is  said.  For  the  removal  of  these 
difficulties  a  revision  was  deemed  advisable. 

As  no  one  universally  received  rite  existed  to 
which  the  Anglican  Church  was  bound  to  conform, 
it  cannot  be  inferred  from  the  rectification  of  her 
ordinal  that  she  had  any  intention  of  departing  from 
Catholic  faith  or  usage.  She  declared  officially  and 
many  times  the  contrary.  In  the  changes  she  made 
she  had  resort  to  Holy  Scripture,  ancient  practice,  and 
Catholic  tradition.  The  alterations  were  not  made 
because  she  accepted  the  Lutheran  or  Protestant 
view  of  the  ministry,  for  she  rejected  the  proposal 
of  the  foreign  Lutheran  Reformers  to  frame  an  ordinal 
after  their  belief.1  She  set  forth  one  founded  on 
essentially  different  and  on  Catholic  principles. 

It  was  not  framed  on  a  denial  of  priesthood  and 
sacrifice.  If  it  had  been,  the  title  of  "  sacerdos  "  or 
priest,  which  implies  sacrifice,  would  have  been 
stricken  out  of  the  prayer-book  as  the  sect  of  Re- 
formed Episcopalians  in  America  has  done.  The 
Church's  intention  was  to  preserve  the  inherited 
ancient  orders.  This  is  proved  by  two  facts :  First, 
by  the  ordinal  itself,  where  the  distinction  between 
the  three  orders  is  preserved,  and  ordination  is  re- 
quired by  one  of  the  Episcopal  order.  The  proper 
"  matter"  is  provided  by  the  laying  on  of  the  bishop's 

1  Denny,  "  Anglican  Orders,"  p.  104. 


ANGLICAN   ORDERS  207 

hands.  An  efficient  "  form "  is  set  forth,  namely, 
prayer  for  the  ordinand,  with  designation  of  the 
order  to  be  conferred  and  authorization  for  its  work, 
together  with  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost  bestowed 
for  its  exercise. 

Secondly,  the  Church  explicitly  declared  her  inten- 
tion to  preserve  the  ancient  orders  in  their  integrity. 
She  declared  her  intention  that  her  priests  should  be 
what  they  were  in  pre-Reformation  times.  She  did 
this  in  a  prpfarpjj>  her  ordinal.  And  here  we  must 
expose  a  common  error  of  interpretation  into  which 
clerical  writers  are  apt  to  fall.  The  private  opinions 
of  the  authors  of  any  law  cannot  logically  or  legally 
be  appealed  to  in  aid  of  its  construction.  The 
opinions,  for  example,  expressed  in  the  debates  in 
Parliament  cannot  be  cited  in  court  to  explain  the 
meaning  of  a  statute.  The  reason  is,  the  statute  is 
the  utterance  of  the  whole  body  as  an  entity,  and  not 
merely  of  those  who  planned  or  advocated  it. 

Now  the  ordinal  was  adopted  by  the  whole  body 
of  bishops,  all  save  one  being  in  favor  of  it.  This 
body  putting  forth  the  ordinal  expressed  its  intention 
officially,  as  we  have  said,  in  its  preface.  We  cannot 
legally  or  logically  go  behind  it  to  get  at  the  ordinal's 
meaning.  It  is  clearly  stated  in  words  which  cannot 
be  misunderstood  or  explained  away.  It  states  that 
"  from  the  Apostles'  time  there  have  been  these 
orders  of  ministers  in  Christ's  Church :  bishops, 
priests,  and  deacons,  .  .  .  and  therefore  to  the  intent 
that  these  orders  may  be  continued,  no  man  shall  be 
accounted  or  taken  to  be  a  lawful  bishop,  priest,  or 
deacon  except  he  be  admitted  thereto  according  to 


208          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 


\ 


the  form  hereafter  following,  or  hath  had  formerly 
Episcopal  consecration  or  ordination." 

This  explicitly  declared  intention  legally  governs 
he  interpretation  of  the  ordinal.  It  also  does  so 
morally,  for  a  principal  in  common  law  is  bound  by 
the  "  holdings  out"  or  representations  of  an  authorized 
agent.  So  it  is  with  the  Church.  She  uses  the  well- 
known  terms,  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons.  On  the 
"  holding  out "  that  she  possesses  them  in  their  ancient 
sense  men  are  induced  to  enter  holy  orders  and  give 
their  lives  to  her  service.  She  is  therefore  estopped 
from  explaining  them  away,  or  putting  any  other 
than  the  recognized  Catholic  sense  upon  them. 

So  much  for  the  intention  of  the  ordinal.  As  for 
the  intention  of  those  who  used  it  in  Archbishop 
Parker's  case,  it  must  be  observed  that  the  bishops 
were  the  officials  of  a  Church  whose  ordinal  was  pro- 
vided for  them.  They  could  not  alter  its  meaning 
by  any  interior  views  of  their  own.  It  is  not,  there- 
fore, to  be  construed  by  their  own  private  opinions 
whatever  they  may  have  been.  Acting  as  they  did 
seriously  and  with  the  intent  of  doing  what  the  Church 
ordered,  their  intention,  as  well  as  that  of  the  Church's 
ordinal,  must  be  taken  to  be  that  of  making  and  con- 
tinuing a  Catholic  priesthood. 

The  care  of  the  Church  is  also  seen  in  the  preser- 
vation of  the  "  matter  and  form "  essential  to  the 
sacrament.  "  Matter "  expresses  the  outward  sign, 
and  "  form  "  the  words  that  accompany  it.  Although 
Pope  Eugenius  IV.  declared  the  proper  matter  to  be 
the  delivery  in  the  service  of  the  paten  and  chalice, 
yet  that  decision  had  to  be  admitted  erroneous  when 


ANGLICAN   ORDERS  209 

it  was  discovered  that  this  ceremony  was  unknown  for 
many  hundred  years.  The  commonly  accepted  belief 
now  is  that  the  "  matter  "  is  the  laying  on  of  hands 
by  the  bishop.  This  the  Anglican  rite  provides  for 
in  the  giving  of  all  the  degrees  of  order. 

There  can  therefore  be  no  question  concerning  the 
validity  of  the  "  matter." 

When  we  come  to  consider  the  "  form  "  we  are  met 
by  the  fact  that  there  never  has  been  one  universal 
formula,  but  it  is  generally  agreed  that  there  should 
be  prayer  for  the  ordinand,  with  a  recognition  of  the 
order  to  be  given  and  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  for 
its  exercise. 

We  must  here  draw  attention  to  the  fact  that  here 
are  two  views  regarding  the  connection  between  the 
matter  and  the  form.  One  is  that  they  must  be  co- 
incident, the  other  that  the  service  being  considered 
as  a  whole,  they  are  legally  and  morally  united  though 
in  different  parts  of  it. 

The  validity  of  Anglican  orders  is  not  affected 
whichever  opinion  is  adopted. 

Let  us  examine  the  first  as  applied  to  the  ordinal 
in  use  at  the  time  of  Archbishop  Parker's  consecra- 
tion. There,  in  the  ordination  of  a  priest,  the  bishop, 
laying  his  hands  on  the  head  of  the  ordinand,  says, 
"  Receive  the  Holy  Ghost :  whose  sins  thou  dost  for- 
give, they  are  forgiven :  and  whose  sins  thou  dost 
retain,  they  are  retained :  and  be  thou  a  faithful  dis- 
penser of  the  Word  of  God,  and  of  His  Holy  Sac- 
raments: In  the  Name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son, 
and  of  the  Holy  Ghost." 

We  have  here  a  bestowal  of  the  Holy  Spirit  for 


210          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

the  exercise  of  a  power  exclusively  sacerdotal,  which 
thus  designates  the  priest's  office,  and  empowers  him 
to  minister  the  "  Word "  and  "  the  Sacraments." 
The  ministering  of  the  sacraments  includes  all  of 
them,  and  all  they  include.  The  authorization  and 
empowering  therefore  includes  the  offering  of  the 
gospel  sacrifice  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ. 

It  is  well  known  that  the  essence  of  the  priesthood 
lies  in  its  function  of  ministering  in  the  Church  and 
for  it,  as  it  offers  itself  up  in  union  with  the  sacrifice 
of  the  altar  to  God,  and  as  it  ministers  for  God  to  its 
members.  It  offers  the  holy  sacrifice  of  the  altar  to 
God,  it  dispenses  from  God  the  pardoning  word  of 
reconciliation.  These  are  the  two  special  works  cited 
in  Trent  as  characteristic  of  the  priesthood.  In  order 
to  express  the  "  Sacerdotium,"  or  priesthood,  it  was 
only  necessary  to  incorporate  one  of  these  into  the 
ordaining  form.  The  Anglican  Church  took  the  one 
used  by  our  Lord  when  He  breathed  upon  the 
Apostles.  To  insist  that  it  is  necessary  more  ex- 
plicitly to  express  the  sacerdotal  function  of  the 
priesthood  would  be  to  invalidate  all  the  orders  of 
Christendom. 

The  Anglican  "  form  "  of  conveying  priesthood  is 
thus  seen  to  be  sufficient  and  valid. 

In  the  bestowal  of  the  episcopate  the  form  given  in 
the  ordinal  was,  "  Take  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  remem- 
ber thou  stir  up  the  grace  of  God,  which  is  in  thee 
by  imposition  of  hands:  for  God  hath  not  given  us 
the  spirit  of  fear,  but  of  power  and  love  and  of  sober- 
ness." This  is  equally  as  valid  a  form  as  that  for  the 
priesthood. 


ANGLICAN   ORDERS  211 

It  is  to  be  remembered  that  this  is  the  text 
cited  in  the  Council  of  Trent  to  prove  holy  orders  a 
sacrament. 

Now  the  same  reason  that  led  the  Anglican  Church 
to  take  for  the  "  form  "  in  the  ordination  of  a  priest 
the  words  of  Christ  when  He  bestowed  a  sacerdotal 
power  led  to  the  taking  of  the  most  significant  words 
in  Holy  Scripture  connected  with  the  character  be- 
longing to  the  episcopate.  The  episcopate  is  the 
order  of  authority  and  power,  it  ordains  and  con- 
secrates and  rules.  It  therefore  requires  a  gift  of 
"power"  for  ordination  and  consecration,  which  is 
here  implied,  and  the  spirit  of  love  and  soberness  to 
rule  wisely  and  well.  Thus,  by  this  text  according 
to  Trent,  the  episcopate  is  designated,  and  the  bishop 
consecrated  is  empowered  with  the  gift  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  coincidently  with  the  laying  on  of  hands. 

If,  on  the  other  hand,  the  other  opinion  is  adopted 
and  the  service  is  regarded  as  a  whole,  the  gift  of 
priesthood  and  of  the  episcopate  is  equally  evident. 
This  opinion  has  two  reasons  in  its  favor.  First,  it 
is  common  sense.  Seeing  that  the  purpose  and  object 
of  the  service  is  to  ordain  or  consecrate  a  person  a 
priest  or  bishop,  the  whole  service  should  legally  be 
construed  together.  Again,  it  is  the  way  our  Lord 
Himself  ordained  the  Apostles.  He  bade  them  at 
one  time  offer  the  holy  sacrifice;  at  another  gave 
them  authority  to  forgive  sin  ;  at  another  commanded 
them  to  baptize ;  lastly,  gave  them  mission  and  juris- 
diction. But  their  consecration  was  not  complete 
until  He  ascended  and  made  them  "  able  ministers 
of  the  Word "  by  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 


212          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

It  seems  to  be  suggested,  as  the  Anglican  Arch- 
bishops say,  by  the  Pope  that  our  present  form  of 
ordination  ought  perhaps  to  be  considered  sufficient, 
if  it  were  not  for  the  fact  that  between  the  years  1549 
and  1662  the  words,  "  For  the  office  and  work  of  a 
priest "  were  lacking.  But  this  is  a  quite  groundless 
objection,  as  the  archbishops  pointed  out  in  their 
reply  to  the  Papal  Bull,  because  during  that  time 
words  designating  priesthood,  which  the  Pope  con- 
siders necessary,  were  contained  in  the  prayer,  "  Al- 
mighty and  everlasting  God,  giver  of  all  good  things, 
who  by  Thy  Holy  Spirit  has  appointed  divers  orders 
of  ministers  in  Thy  Church,  mercifully  behold  these 
Thy  servants  now  called  to  the  office  of  Priesthood" 
This  prayer,  it  must  be  remembered,  was  at  that  time 
part  of  the  ordination  proper,  and  not,  as  now,  the 
Collect  of  the  Mass,  of  which  fact  the  Pope  seemed  to 
be  unaware. 

But  even  now,  however,  this  Collect  is  not  separated 
in  time  so  far  as  the  potential  words  of  Christ  to  the 
Apostles  to  offer  the  Holy  Sacrifice  and  the  effective 
gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  at  Pentecost  which  enabled 
them  to  do  so.  If  thus  the  "  matter  and  form  "  must 
for  validity  be  absolutely  coincident,  then  the  Twelve, 
including  Peter,  were  never  consecrated  Apostles. 

Let  us  then  consider  the  service  as  a  whole.  We 
are  compelled  by  the  declaration  in  the  preface  to 
interpret  the  terms  priest  and  bishop  in  their  ancient 
sense.  We  find  in  the  ordinal,  as  set  forth,  the  "  in- 
tention and  form  "  declaratory  of  the  priesthood  and 
episcopate  wrought  into  every  part.  The  titles  of 
the  offices  are,  "  The  form  of  Ordering  Priests," 


AKGLICAN   ORDERS  213 

"  The  form  of  Consecrating  a  Bishop."  The  person 
presenting  the  deacons  has  to  say,  "  Reverend  Father 
in  God,  I  present  unto  you  these  persons  present,  to 
be  admitted  to  the  order  of  Priesthood."  In  the  pres- 
entation of  the  elect  bishop,  "  We  present  unto  you 
this  godly  man  to  be  Ordained  and  Consecrated 
Bishop."  In  the  case  of  the  deacons  the  bishop  says, 
"  Good  People,  these  are  they  whom  we  purpose  to 
receive  unto  the  holy  Office  of  Priesthood."  In  the 
Litany  the  bishop  prays  God  "  To  bless  these  Thy 
servants  now  to  be  admitted  to  the  Order  of  Priests." 
He  prays  in  the  Litany  for  the  elect  bishop  that  God 
would  send  His  grace  on  him  that  he  may  duly  exe- 
cute the  office  to  which  he  is  called.  In  the  collect 
for  the  Communion,  which  expresses  the  intention  of 
the  holy  sacrifice  about  to  be  offered,  the  celebrant 
prays  God,  "Who  hast  appointed  divers  Orders  of 
Ministers  in  the  Church ;  Mercifully  behold  these 
now  called  to  the  Office  of  Priesthood  and  so  replenish 
and  adorn  them,  that  they  may  faithfully  serve  Thee 
in  this  Office."  The  collect  for  the  consecration  of 
bishops  recognizes  their  distinctive  office  as  based 
upon  that  of  the  Apostles,  and  prays  for  grace  on  all 
bishops. 

In  the  exhortation  made  to  those  to  be  ordained 
priests  they  are  put  in  charge  how  "  high  a  Dignity, 
and  to  how  weighty  an  Office  "  they  are  called.  In 
the  solemn  and  deep  words  of  Holy  Scripture,  they 
are  as  priests  "  to  be  Messengers,  Watchmen,  and 
Stewards  of  the  Lord."  "Messengers,"  that  is,  angels. 
Messengers  sent  with  a  heavenly  message  and  divine 
authority.  They  are,  as  S.  Paul  calls  them,  certified 


214          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

and  authorized  "  ambassadors  of  Christ,"  speaking  in 
His  name  and  by  His  authority.  They  are  "  watch- 
men," that  is,  guardians,  to  whom  is  committed  the 
guardianship  of  the  kingdom  of  Christ  and  the 
faith.  They  are  "  stewards,"  who  by  their  office  are 
official  mediators  between  the  members  of  the  mysti- 
cal body  and  its  head;  the  offerers  up  of  all  the 
body  owes  its  head  in  connection  with  the  appointed 
gospel  sacrifice,  and  the  dispensers  of  all  that  the 
head,  by  His  sacraments,  bestows  on  the  members. 

In  the  response  made  by  the  elect  to  the  bishop, 
he  declares,  in  the  name  of  God,  that  he  believes 
himself  called  to  "  the  Order  and  Ministry  of  Priest- 
hood." The  Holy  Ghost  having  been  solemnly  in- 
voked by  the  recitation  of  the  Veni  Creator  Spiritus, 
prayer  is  said  over  the  persons  to  be  ordained  or  con- 
secrated. Then  follows  the  laying  on  of  hands  by  the 
bishop,  who  says  the  grace-bestowing  form,  "  Receive 
the  Holy  Ghost,"  and,  as  we  have  seen,  at  the  same 
time  in  the  Edwardine  Ordinal  by  words  significant 
of  the  office. 

Thus  the  ordination  of  the  Anglican  priest  is  utterly 
unlike  in  kind  and  character  to  the  authorization  of 
a  Protestant  minister,  where  priesthood  and  sacrifice 
are  not  recognized. 

Not  without  its  significance  also  is  the  fact  that  in 
the  Edwardine  Ordinal,  and  our  present  one,  the 
ordination  and  consecration  service  are  incorporated 
into  the  mass.  The  ordination  does  not  form  a 
separate  service  by  itself.  It  does  not  come  before 
or  after  the  Holy  Communion.  It  is,  as  liturgical 
writers  say,  "  farced  "  into  it  and  so  becomes  part  of 


ANGLICAN   ORDERS  215 

it.  It  comes  in  before  the  Offertory.  The  Church 
is  about  to  offer  herself,  body,  soul,  and  spirit,  to  God 
in  connection  with  her  head.  She  does  this  by  an 
identification  with  Him  in  the  sacrament  of  the  altar. 
Hither  come  those  to  make  an  offering  of  themselves 
to  be  priests  or  bishops,  as  identified  with  Christ's 
offices  and  for  their  extension. 

To  say  there  is  not  a  sacerdotium  or  priesthood 
designated  in  our  ordinal  is  like  saying  in  broad  day- 
light the  sun  is  not  shining.  The  Anglican  ordinal 
from  beginning  to  end  is  full  of  priesthood,  and  pen- 
etrated and  illuminated  by  it. 

O  sad  perversity  of  the  human  spirit  that  blinds 
itself  to  the  truth !  O  foolish  and  deceived  by  party 
zeal,  who,  though  unconsciously,  hinder  the  divine 
purpose.  O  weak  and  doubting  hearts  that  fail  to 
see  the  mountain  full  of  protecting  angel  hosts. 
A  day  of  gloom  it  was  when  years  ago  Newman 
addressed  his  memorable  apostrophe  to  England's 
Church  and  then  bade  her  farewell.  But  the  grace 
of  her  sacraments  has  transformed  her  life  and  given 
another  meaning  to  his  words.  "  O  Mother  of  Saints  ! 
School  of  the  Wise  !  Nurse  of  the  heroic  !  Of  whom 
went  forth,  in  whom  have  dwelt  memorable  names  of 
old  to  spread  the  truth  abroad  or  cherish  and  incul- 
cate it  at  home !  O  thou  from  whom  surrounding 
nations  lit  their  lamps !  "  How  hast  thou  arisen  as 
from  the  dust !  How  hast  the  reproach  upon  thee  of 
a  "  miscarrying  womb  and  dry  breasts  "  been  done 
away.  Marvel  of  marvels  !  Miracle  of  repair  !  The 
branch  again  puts  forth  her  leaves  and  buds,  and 
bears  fruit  an  hundred-fold.  A  new  enthusiasm  for 


216          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

man  as  well  as  love  of  God  fills  her  with  fresh  mis- 
sionary zeal.  Her  educated  sons  have  gone  down  to 
live  in  the  slums  of  great  cities  among  the  poor,  to 
elevate  them  by  their  friendly  intercourse.  Her 
daughters  have  given  themselves  by  hundreds  to  the 
religious  life  with  its  noble  service.  Again  the  voice 
of  the  ancient  bishops  and  fathers  is  heard  in  her 
pulpits.  Again  is  the  one  sure  and  certain  faith 
Nicaea  taught  of  old  proclaimed.  Again  the  daily 
sacrifice  is  being  restored  to  her  altars.  She  is  being 
recognized  in  her  true  character.  She  is  the  shrine 
of  truth,  guardian  of  the  faith,  teacher  of  the  nations, 
blessed  home  for  the  lonely,  refuge  for  the  dis- 
tressed, ark  for  the  perishing,  body  of  Christ  in 
which  He  dwells,  through  which  He  acts.  The 
truth  of  the  old  prophecy,  as  Neale  wrote,  is  being 
fulfilled. 

"  Again  do  long  processions  sweep  through  the  cathedral  pile ; 
Again  do  banner,  cross,  and  cope  gleam  thro'  the  incensed 

aisle ; 
And   the  faithful  dead  do  claim  their  part  in  the  Church's 

thankful  prayer, 

And  the  daily  Sacrifice  to  God  is  duly  offered  there ; 
And  many  an  earnest  prayer  ascends  from  many  a  hidden  spot ; 
And  England's  Church  is  Catholic,  though  England's  self  be 

not." 


CHAPTER   XII 
THE   SEVEN    MYSTERIES 

THE  gospel  system  is  analogous  to  the  processes 
of  God  in  the  natural  world.  In  nature  we  see 
how  God  bestows  His  gifts.  He  loves  to  give  them 
while  He  hides  His  hand.  Love  indeed  must  mani- 
fest itself,  but  true  power  loves  hiddenness.  "  Verily," 
says  the  prophet,  "  Thou  art  a  God  that  hideth  Thy- 
self, O  God  of  Israel  the  Saviour."  So,  hiding  Him- 
self in  nature,  He  bestows  His  gifts  through  multiform 
instrumentalities.  Thus  life  and  strength  come  to  us 
through  ordained  means.  God  sustains  our  natural 
life  through  sacraments  of  the  natural  order.  So  it 
is  in  the  order  of  grace. 

Our  prayer-book  employs  two  terms  to  describe 
them.  It  speaks  of  the  "  Sacraments "  and  of  the 
"  Holy  Mysteries."  They  denote  the  same  things 
under  different  aspects.  A  sacrament  is  an  outward 
and  visible  sign  of  an  inward  and  spiritual  grace.  It 
is  also  a  mystery  by  which  the  grace  of  God  is  given 
unto  us. 

They  are  conveniently  arranged  in  two  classes. 
First,  there  are  those  sacraments  whose  "  matter  and 
form  "  were  ordained  by  Christ  and  are  of  universal 
application.  These  are  Baptism  and  the  Holy  Com- 
munion. They  are  necessary  for  salvation  where 
they  may  be  had,  and  they  have  relation  to  the  eternal 


2i8          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

existence  and  welfare  of  the  Church.  In  the  other 
class  are  to  be  found  Confirmation,  Penitence,  Unc- 
tion, Orders,  Matrimony.  They  are  not  necessary 
for  all  men,  and  have  relation  to  the  temporal  life 
of  the  Church.  She  needs  them  in  her  militant  state 
and  in  her  battle  with  sin. 

The  first  in  order  of  these  is  holy  baptism.  We  shall 
understand  Christian  baptism  better  if  we  analyze  the 
four  kinds  of  baptism  found  in  the  New  Testament. 

There  is  first  in  order  the  baptism  administered 
by  John  the  Baptist.  This,  though  often  confused 
with  it,  was  not  Christian  baptism.  It  is  proven  not 
to  have  been  such  by  two  conclusive  reasons.  It 
was  not  given  in  the  name  of  the  Blessed  Trinity, 
as  Christian  baptism  must  be,  for  the  simple  reason 
that  the  name  of  the  Blessed  Trinity  had  not  been 
revealed  to  S.  John  Baptist.  It  had  not  connected 
with  it  any  sanctifying  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  for 
the  "  Spirit  was  not  yet  given."  S.  John  was  the 
last  and  greatest  prophet  of  the  old  dispensation, 
and  his  baptism  was  like  a  Jewish  ordinance.  It  was 
a  mere  outward  sign,  but  had  no  inward  spiritual 
gift.  In  other  words,  it  was  not  a  gospel  sacra- 
ment. The  Apostles  also  baptized  in  like  manner 
before  Pentecost,  but  it  was  only  a  continuation  of 
John's  preparatory  work.  The  manner,  therefore,  in 
which  S.  John  baptized,  whether  with  more  or  less 
water,  would  be  no  guide  for  Christian  usage.  And 
not  being  Christian  baptism,  when  the  baptized  dis- 
ciples became  Christians  they  had,  as  we  read  in  the 
nineteenth  chapter  of  the  Acts,  to  receive  the  Christian 
sacrament. 


THE   SEVEN   MYSTERIES  219 

The  next  baptism  is  that  of  Jesus  Christ  by  S.  John. 
Why  did  He  who  was  sinless  come  to  a  baptism 
of  repentance?  Because  having  taken  flesh  of  the 
Blessed  Virgin,  He  had  thus  identified  Himself  with 
our  race  and  became,  as  the  second  Adam,  its  new 
representative  head.  As  such  He  took  upon  Himself 
the  duty  of  making  a  reparation  to  God  for  its  trans- 
gressions. He  thus  begins,  in  His  official  capacity, 
His  life-long  act  of  penitence.  There  was  another 
reason  for  Christ's  action.  He  was  to  make  repara- 
tion to  God  and  work  out  man's  deliverance  by  the 
fulfilment  of  His  office  as  the  Anointed  One,  or 
Messiah.  He  was  solemnly  consecrated  to  be  the 
Christ  at  His  baptism.  The  heavens  were  opened 
and  the  voice  of  the  Eternal  Father  was  heard  :  "  This 
is  My  beloved  Son,  in  whom  I  am  well  pleased,"  and 
the  Holy  Ghost,  who  from  the  first  moment  of  His 
conception  had  been  given  without  measure  to  Him, 
now  was  also  given  for  His  special  work  and  office, 
and  He  was  anointed  with  the  Holy  Ghost. 

The  next  baptism  we  read  of  is  the  baptism  by 
Jesus  Christ  Himself.  During  His  visible  or  public 
life,  Jesus,  we  read,  did  not  baptize.  But  John  the 
Baptist  had  foretold  that  He  who  came  after  him 
should  baptize  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with  fire. 
This  Christ  did  when  He  had  ascended.  Then  He 
baptized  the  Church ;  the  outward  sign  being  tongues 
of  fire  and  a  mighty  wind,  the  inward  gift  being  the 
Holy  Spirit.  The  whole  mystical  body  was  now  bap- 
tized and  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  filled  the  temple. 

The  fourth  baptism  is  Christian  baptism.  This  was 
first  administered  by  the  Apostles  to  the  converts  on 


220          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

the  day  of  Pentecost.  This  was  with  water  and  in 
the  name  of  the  Blessed  Trinity. 

Its  subjects  are  both  adults  and  infants.  The  con- 
dition for  adults  is  faith  and  repentance.  Infants  are 
baptized  because  our  Lord  said  "  Suffer  little  children 
to  come  unto  Me,  and  forbid  them  not,"  and  showed 
that  unconscious  infancy  was  capable  of  receiving  a 
blessing,  by  taking  them  up  in  His  arms  and  blessing 
them.  Faith  and  repentance  are  not  required  of 
infants,  for  not  having  sinned  they  have  no  sins  of 
which  to  repent.  And  not  having  raised  their  wills 
against  God  there  is  no  necessity  for  their  taking 
them  down  by  an  act  of  submission  or  faith.  Thus 
the  passive  condition  of  the  infant  is  the  normal  one 
for  receiving  the  baptismal  gift.  By  repentance  and 
faith  the  adult  puts  himself  in  the  condition  of  a 
little  child.  We  thus  become  like  little  children, 
and  fulfil  the  condition  necessary  to  enter  the  king- 
dom. 

By  its  action  baptism  bestows  a  gift  which  can 
most  easily  be  remembered  by  reference  to  its  effects 
in  regard  to  our  past,  present,  and  future. 

In  respect  of  our  past,  it  heals  the  wounds  of 
inherited  or  original  sin,  and  remits  all  our  actual 
sins.  "  I  believe  in  one  baptism  for  the  remission 
of  sins."  This  gift  of  God  is  bestowed  upon  us  for 
the  merits  of  Christ  by  the  operation  of  the  Holy 
Ghost. 

A  marked  scriptural  instance  is  to  be  found  in 
the  case  of  S.  Paul.  On  his  way  to  Damascus 
our  Lord  appeared  to  him.  The  brightness  of  our 
Lord's  glorified  body  caused  his  blindness,  but  the 


THE   SEVEN   MYSTERIES  221 

Lord's  words  illuminated  his  soul.  With  agonized 
earnestness  Saul  cried  out,  "  Lord,  what  wilt  thou 
have  me  to  do?"  He  was  then  and  there  a  truly 
converted  man.  It  is  a  crucial  question  for  sectarians 
whether  his  sins  were  forgiven  at  the  time  of  his 
conversion.  Their  theological  system  requires  an 
affirmative  answer.  But  in  Holy  Scripture  we  read 
it  was  not  so.  For,  three  days  after,  Ananias,  the 
prophet  of  the  Lord,  comes  to  him  and  says, 
"  Brother  Saul,  arise  and  be  baptized  and  wash 
away  thy  sins."  His  sins  not  being  washed  away 
by  his  conversion,  but  as  Scripture  states  by  his 
subsequent  baptism.  Conversion  is  the  turning  of 
man  to  God.  Remission  of  sin  in  baptism  is  the 
gift  of  God  to  man. 

As  related  to  the  present  time;  by  baptism  we 
are  born  again,  or  "  born  from  above."  This  implies 
two  things,  our  being  begotten  anew  by  heavenly 
power,  and  our  being  born  out  of  a  natural  region 
of  darkness  into  one  of  light.  We  are  begotten  anew 
by  the  Holy  Spirit,  which,  blowing  where  it  listeth, 
works  the  soul's  conversion ;  and  also  in  baptism 
(the  Holy  Spirit  accomplishing  that  whereunto  it 
is  sent),  we  receive  a  new  nature  by  our  incorpora- 
tion into  Christ.  "  For  as  many  of  you  as  were 
baptized  unto  Christ  did  put  on  Christ." 

We  discern  here  a  distinction  between  our  relation 
to  God  by  nature  and  that  formed  by  baptism.  By 
the  act  of  creation  we  are  God's  creatures ;  by  bap- 
tism we  are  the  sons  of  God  as  members  of  Christ. 
Thus  baptism  is  not  like  the  coronation  of  a  king  to 
which  it  is  sometimes  compared,  for  the  king  is  one 


222          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

by  right  of  his  descent  before  he  is  crowned.  Bap- 
tism, however,  is  not  an  acknowledgment  of  what  we 
previously  were,  but  an  instrument  by  which  we  are 
made  members  of  Christ  and  so  children  of  God. 

Next  as  to  the  future.  Having  been,  by  baptism, 
born  into  the  kingdom  of  light,  a  prospect  is  opened 
before  us  of  attaining  to  the  further  light  of  the 
beatific  vision  of  God.  We  are  made  children  of  the 
light.  We  are  incorporated  into  this  new  kingdom 
as  living  stones  of  a  living  temple.  And  so  we  are 
not  merely  born  into  and  immersed  in  it,  but  it  is 
also  in  us.  The  incipient  virtues  of  faith,  hope,  and 
charity  are  imparted  by  baptism.  These  gifts  re- 
ceived may  be  neglected  and  lie  dormant,  but  as  we 
respond,  more  and  more  clear  becomes  the  heavenly 
vision,  and  we  receive  strength  to  attain  it. 

The  effect  of  the  loss  of  baptism  is  painfully  seen 
in  America,  in  the  increased  power  of  evil  spirits,  and 
the  ease  with  which  Satan  deludes  persons  with  false 
religions,  and  by  teachers  who  come  in  their  own 
name. 

The  baptismal  faith  is  decisively  expressed  in  our 
baptismal  offices.  None  can  be  found  more  full  of 
Scriptural  and  Catholic  tradition.  We  utter  it  in  the 
words  of  our  Church's  hymnal  in  praise  and  devotion  : 

"  Arise  and  be  baptized, 

And  wash  thy  sins  away ; 
Thy  league  with  God  be  solemnized, 

Thy  faith  avouched  to-day. 
No  more  thine  own,  but  Christ's ; 

With  all  the  saints  of  old, 
Apostles,  seers,  evangelists, 

And  martyr  throngs  enrolled." 


THE   SEVEN   MYSTERIES  223 

The  second  gospel  mystery  is  confirmation.  It  has 
three  designations  in  Holy  Scripture.  It  belongs 
to  the  general  Apostolic  ministrations  of  laying  on  of 
hands,  which  is  spoken  of  as  one  of  the  principles  of 
the  doctrine  of  Christ.1 

It  is  also  referred  to  as  an  anointing  or  unction. 
"  Ye  have  an  unction  from  the  Holy  One  and  ye 
know  all  things.  And  the  anointing  which  ye  have 
received  of  Him  abideth  in  you,  and  ye  need  not 
that  any  man  teach  you ;  but  as  the  same  anointing 
teacheth  you  of  all  things,  and  is  truth,  and  is  no  lie, 
and  even  as  it  hath  taught  you,  abide  therein."2 

Again,  it  is  known  as  the  seal  of  the  Lord.  "  Now 
He  which  stablisheth  us  with  you  in  Christ  (by 
baptism)  and  hath  anointed  us,  is  God ;  who  hath 
also  sealed  us,  and  given  the  earnest  of  the  Spirit  in 
our  hearts."3 

It  is  administered  by  a  bishop  in  the  West,  or  by  a 
priest  with  chrism,  consecrated  by  a  bishop,  in  the 
East. 

"In  the  Anglican  Church  it  is  by  laying  on  of  the 
bishop's  hand,  who  in  doing  so  in  Scotland  and  in 
other  places  makes  with  his  thumb  the  sign  of  the 
cross  on  the  forehead  of  the  confirmed.  It  is  to  be 
desired,  for  conformity  with  the  symbolism  of  Holy 
Scripture,  that  this  should  be  with  chrism.  Does  it 
lie  within  the  jus  liturgicum  of  the  bishop  to  do  so? 

An  interesting  question  has  been  of  late  much  in- 
vestigated by  Anglican  theologians,  concerning  the 
difference  between  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in 
baptism  and  confirmation. 

1  Heb.  vi.  2.  2  i  John  ii.  20,  27.  *  2  Cor.  i.  21,  22. 


224          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

Baptism  is  the  sacrament  of  our  new  birth  in  Christ. 
We  are  brought  under  the  converting  influence  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  before  baptism,  and  as  a  preparation  for 
it.  In  baptism,  by  the  operation  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
we  are  made  members  of  Christ  and  of  His  mystical 
body.  Being  thus  united  to  the  humanity  of  Christ 
in  whom  the  Spirit  dwells,  we  are  in  Him  made,  in- 
directly, partakers  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Being  made 
living  stones  of  the  Spiritual  Temple  which  is  filled 
with  the  Holy  Spirit,  we  are  immersed  in  it,  and  the 
Spirit  is  in  us.  We  receive  in  baptism  both  sancti- 
fying grace  and  the  Holy  Spirit.  Sanctifying  grace, 
which  is  necessary  for  our  justification,  the  Holy 
Spirit,  who  unites  us  to  Christ.  If  we  did  not  re- 
ceive the  Holy  Spirit  ..hen  confirmation  would  be 
a  sacrament  necessary  to  salvation.  We  pray  in  the 
baptismal  office,  "  Give  Thy  Holy  Spirit  to  this 
infant,"  and  what  we  pray  for,  that  we  believe  we 
receive. 

Confirmation  is  a  sacrament  of  the  gifts  of  the 
Spirit.  It  does  not  merely  increase  the  gifts  received 
in  baptism.  Even  if  one  were  made  full  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  at  baptism,  this  would  not  preclude  him  from 
receiving  new  and  distinct  gifts,  for  the  activities  of 
the  Spirit  are  not  governed  by  the  laws  of  material 
mechanics.  So  gifts,  different  in  kind,  are  bestowed 
by  confirmation.  Born  anew  in  baptism  and  made  a 
child  of  God,  in  confirmation  we  are  ordained  and 
receive  our  first  degree  of  priesthood  and  kingship. 
All  the  laity  are  made  kings  and  priests  unto  God. 
In  confirmation  we  receive  also  our  mission  to  work 
for  Christ  in  the  world,  and  grace  for  its  fulfilment. 


THE   SEVEN   MYSTERIES  225 

The  laity,  in  all  their  church  work,  go  out  "  as  sent" 
by  the  Lord.  Receiving  sanctifying  grace  for  our  jus- 
tification in  baptism,  we  receive  in  confirmation  the 
sevenfold  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost  for  our  advance- 
ment and  perfection  in  the  spiritual  life.  These  are 
the  spirit  of  wisdom,  which  makes  us  seek  after  God ; 
of  understanding,  which  teaches  us  the  Catholic  faith ; 
of  counsel,  which  enables  us  to  choose  the  path  of 
duty ;  of  ghostly  strength,  which  enables  us  to  per- 
form our  Christian  obligations;  of  knowledge,  which 
instructs  us  in  the  will  of  God  as  it  pertains  to  our- 
selves; of  true  Godliness,  which  inspires  us  to  live 
holy  lives;  of  holy  fear,  which  preserves  us  in  rev- 
erence and  the  worship  of  God. 

In  confirmation  we  are  also  sealed  and  receive  a 
character.  In  the  old  dispensation  we  read  that 
"  seals  "  were  given  by  God  as  tokens  of  spiritual  citi- 
zenship ;  but  in  the  Christian  state  we  receive  not 
tokens  or  empty  signs,  we  do  not  receive  "seals" 
only,  but  by  the  power  of  the  Spirit  we  are  sealed. 
The  distinction  between  the  two  is  like  unto  the  giv- 
ing a  person  a  ring  to  wear  as  a  token  of  friendship, 
or  the  impressing  of  the  ring  engraved  with  its  arms 
upon  the  wax.  Confirmation  imprints  an  ineffaceable 
character  on  the  soul.  This  character  is  impressed, 
not  on  the  essence  of  the  soul,  but  on  its  intellectual 
and  effective  powers.  The  child  of  grace  becomes 
in  a  degree  a  priest  and  king,  and  an  armed  soldier 
in  the  army  of  Christ.  Thus  we  sing  in  our  con- 
firmation hymn: 

"  O  Christ,  who  didst  at  Pentecost 
Send  down  from  heaven  the  Holy  Ghost; 


226          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

And  at  Samaria  baptize 
Those  whom  Thou  didst  evangelize; 
And  then  on  Thy  baptized  confer 
The  best  of  gifts,  the  Comforter 
By  Apostolic  hands  and  prayer; 
Be  with  us  now,  as  Thou  wert  there. 

"  Thus  consecrated,  Lord,  to  Thee, 
May  each  a  living  temple  be. 
Enrich  that  temple's  holy  shrine 
With  sevenfold  gifts  of  grace  divine ; 
With  wisdom,  light,  and  knowledge  bless, 
Strength,  counsel,  fear,  and  godliness." 

The  third  gospel  mystery  is  known  in  Eastern  and 
Western  Christendom  as  the  sacrament  of  penitence. 
It  is  the  sacrament  of  restoration.  It  restores  to 
the  soul  the  spiritual  life  lost  or  injured  by  sin.  Like 
all  other  mysteries  it  may  be  considered  in  regard  to 
its  matter  and  form.  The  three  acts  of  penitence, 
which  may  be  regarded  as  the  matter,  are  contrition, 
confession,  and  satisfaction  or  amendment.  The  ab- 
solution of  the  priest  is  the  form.  Together  these 
signify  and  effect  the  sinner's  reconciliation  with 
God ;  his  spiritual  resurrection  and  restoration  in 
grace. 

Contrition  demands  first  a  knowledge  of  God's 
love  to  us  in  Christ,  and  a  knowledge  of  ourselves. 
This  latter  can  only  be  obtained  by  self-examination 
and  prayer.  We  must  ask  God  to  show  us  our- 
selves and  Himself.  We  must,  if  we  have  never 
done  so,  review  our  life  in  its  different  parts  and 
relationships,  and  see  what  we  have  done  or  left 
undone.  We  must  examine  ourselves  in  the  light  of 
God's  commandments,  the  seven  deadly  sins,  the 


THE   SEVEN   MYSTERIES  227 

precepts  of  the  Gospel,  the  duties  of  our  station, 
our  privileged  weaknesses  and  faults.  We  must  try 
to  see  ourselves  in  the  light  of  God's  justice,  holi- 
ness, and  of  His  love,  for,  out  of  His  love,  who  could 
bear  so  ghastly  a  sight? 

Contrition  combines  sorrow  for  having  offended 
God  with  a  fear  and  hatred  of  sin,  and  a  sincere 
determination  not  to  offend  again.  It  is  either  per- 
fect or  imperfect  It  is  called  perfect  when  the 
dominating  motive  is  the  love  of  God,  or  imperfect 
when  controlled  by  lesser  religious  motives,  such  as 
the  fear  of  hell  or  the  loss  of  heaven.  But  mere 
natural  motives,  such  as  the  results  of  sin,  the  loss  of 
honor,  the  confusion  of  exposure,  the  obstacles  our 
faults  oppose  to  worldly  success,  these  do  not  deserve 
the  name  of  contrition.  For  contrition  must  be  an 
act  of  the  heart  and  will,  and  be  inspired  by  motives 
based  on  religion.  There  must  also  be  with  our 
sorrow  a  fear  and  hatred  of  sin  ;  a  fear,  because  our 
nature  is  so  composite,  our  hearts  are  so  self-deceiv- 
ing, temptation  is  so  subtle,  our  falls  have  been  so 
many.  Because  also  we  grow  in  the  love  of  God  just 
in  proportion  as  we  grow  in  the  hatred  of  sin ;  be- 
cause this  hatred  develops  the  strength  of  will,  ena- 
bling us  to  contend  successfully  with  this  deadly 
enemy. 

Contrition  also  demands  a  holy  determination  to 
amend.  The  marks  of  such  a  sincere  resolve  are, 
fidelity  in  prayer,  vigilance  against  our  spiritual 
enemies,  watchful  correspondence  with  the  interior 
warnings  of  the  Spirit,  a  rigorous  avoiding  of  the 
occasions  of  sin.  We  must  learn,  as  S.  Augustine 


228         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

said,  to  take  the  little  ones,  the  first  temptations,  and 
dash  them  against  the  rock  that  is  Christ. 

Confession  is  the  next  step  in  the  soul's  restoration. 
It  has  its  source  in  our  moral  nature  that  demands  it. 
Its  duty  has  been  revealed  in  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ment. It  must  be  made  to  God,  against  whom  we 
have  sinned.  As  Christians  it  must  be  made  to  Him 
in  the  person  of  Jesus  Christ,  for  to  Him  all  judgment 
has  been  committed.  In  His  great  love  He  has  left 
those  who  represent  Him,  and  who  can  communicate 
to  us  His  pardoning  grace.  They  can  say  in  His 
name,  son,  daughter,  thy  sins  be  forgiven  thee,  go 
in  peace. 

The  form  of  this  sacrament  is  the  priest's  word  of 
absolution.  As  possessed  of  this  power  the  gospel 
ministry  is  called  the  ministry  of  reconciliation.  This 
power  of  absolution  our  Lord  gave  to  His  Church 
when  He  breathed  on  the  Apostles  and  said,  "  Re- 
ceive ye  the  Holy  Ghost:  whose  soever  sins  ye  re- 
mit, they  are  remitted  unto  them,  and  whose  soever 
sins  ye  retain,  they  are  retained."  When  our  Lord 
spoke  these  words  most  probably  others  besides  the 
Apostles  were  present.  There  was  reason  for  this. 
Forgiveness  of  sins  has  reference  both  to  sin  in  its 
relation  to  God  and  in  its  relation  to  the  Church's 
discipline  and  to  those  whom  we  have  injured.  It 
requires  therefore  both  a  personal  forgiveness,  an 
ecclesiastical  pardon  as  well  as  divine  forgiveness. 
To  the  Christian  priesthood  was  given  the  power  of 
dispensing  the  two  latter. 

It  may  well  be  noticed  that  our  Lord  gave  to  the 
Apostles  their  manifold  powers  at  different  times. 


THE   SEVEN   MYSTERIES  229 

They  were  authorized  at  one  time  to  preach,  at 
another  to  administer  discipline,  at  another  to  heal 
the  sick,  so  also  to  ordain,  to  baptize,  to  offer  the 
Holy  Eucharist.  Each  power  of  the  priesthood  was 
given  separately.  So  here  we  must  conclude  that  a 
special  power  to  absolve  the  penitent  was  given  to 
the  Apostles. 

Christ,  in  this  mystery  of  love,  comes  as  the  Good 
Shepherd  seeking  His  wandering  sheep.  He  comes 
to  gather  it  up,  trembling  and  with  bleeding  feet,  and 
take  it  in  His  arms  and  bear  it  back  to  the  fold.  No 
sinner  is  so  vile  but  the  Sacred  Heart  is  open  to  him; 
no  sins  are  so  black  that  the  precious  blood  cannot 
cleanse.  The  reason  given  why  frequent  communions 
often  do  not  advance  the  soul  more,  is  that  persons 
venture  into  the  King's  presence  uncleansed  and  un- 
absolved.  In  the  Eucharist  Jesus  summons  us  to  the 
banquet  of  His  love,  which  is  a  foretaste  of  heaven, 
but  we  must  go  having  on  the  clean  wedding  garment. 
We  go  otherwise  at  our  peril.  He  has  provided  most 
freely  for  our  reception  of  one.  The  tribunal  of 
penitence  is  the  covenanted  seat  of  mercy.  It  is  the 
way  of  rehabilitation :  "  Take  away  his  filthy  gar- 
ments and  give  him  a  change  of  raiment." 

"  Weary  of  earth  and  laden  with  my  sin, 
I  look  at  heaven  and  long  to  enter  in  ; 
But  there  no  evil  thing  may  find  a  home ; 
And  yet  I  hear  a  voice  that  bids  me  '  Come.' 

"  The  while  I  fain  would  tread  the  heavenly  way, 
Evil  is  ever  with  me  day  by  day  ; 
Yet  on  mine  ears  the  gracious  tidings  fall, 
'  Repent,  confess,  thou  shall  be  loosed  from  all.' " 


230          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

The  next  mystery  is  that  of  holy  unction.  As 
penitence  is  concerned  with  the  healing  of  the  soul, 
unction  is  concerned  primarily  with  the  healing  of 
the  body.  Our  blessed  Lord  redeemed  our  whole 
nature,  body  and  soul,  and  it  was  but  fitting  that  He 
should  provide  sacramentally  for  the  needs  of  each. 

The  body  is  the  tabernacle  of  the  soul,  the  house 
which  it  inhabits.  It  is  the  garden  in  which  the  soul 
dwells.  It  is  intrusted  to  man  as  the  fair  garden  of 
Eden  was  to  Adam.  We  are  placed  in  it  to  take  care 
of  it,  to  rule  over  it,  and  keep  it  in  subjection.  It  is 
to  be  our  servant,  not  our  master.  By  the  discipline 
thus  imposed  our  souls  are  trained  in  Christian 
knighthood.  Our  bodies  being  the  temples  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  we  stand  guard  over  His  honor  who 
trusts  Himself  to  our  care.  We  are  to  stand  on  guard, 
like  the  cherubim  at  the  gates  of  Paradise,  whose  eyes 
were  like  a  flame,  and  whose  hand  held  a  blazing 
sword.  But  the  body  is  not  only  to  be  kept  under 
the  sceptre  of  the  will.  It  must  be  cared  for  in  its 
weakness,  disorder,  and  pain.  "  A  merciful  man," 
said  S.  Francis,  speaking  of  the  body,  "  must  be 
merciful  to  his  beast."  The  body  and  its  soul  must, 
however,  temporarily,  at  least,  cease  to  be  companions. 
We  all  have  to  pass  through  the  dark  valley  and  bear 
its  sorrow. 

But  He  who  knows  our  necessities  has  provided 
for  us  with  a  mother's  care  a  sacrament  testifying 
to  His  protection,  conveying  its  own  restorative 
aid,  and  blessing  the  means  used  for  our  body's  re- 
covery. So  we  read  that,  having  received  authority 
from  Jesus  Christ,  they  "  anointed  with  oil  many  that 


THE   SEVEN   MYSTERIES  231 

were  sick,  and  healed  them."1  They  provided  for 
the  continuance  of  this  blessing.  "  Is  any  sick  among 
you  ?  Let  him  call  for  the  elders  of  the  Church ;  and 
let  them  pray  over  him,  anointing  him  with  oil  in  the 
name  of  the  Lord  ;  and  the  prayer  of  faith  shall  save 
the  sick,  and  the  Lord  shall  raise  him  up."2 

The  occasion  of  its  official  promulgation  by  S. 
James  is  not  given,  but  we  may  well  surmise  it. 
There  were  many  after  Pentecost  who  were  possessed 
of  special  gifts,  among  them  that  of  healing.  The 
ill  and  the  sick  person's  friends  would  naturally  seek 
out  those  who  possessed,  or  who  were  supposed  to 
possess,  this  special  gift.  It  was  pfobably  to  check 
a  tendency  not  unaccompanied  with  spiritual  dangers 
both  to  the  persons  interested  and  to  the  Church's 
good  order  that  S.  James  gave  his  directions.  The 
sick  were  not  to  seek  out  those  accounted  possessed 
of  miraculous  powers,  but  to  send  for  the  elders  or 
priests.  So  far  as  the  care  of  the  body  was  concerned 
no  specially  gifted  person  was  necessary.  Let  the 
faithful  trust  themselves  to  the  prayers  of  the  ordained 
priesthood.  The  ordained  elder  was  a  righteous  man 
whom  God  would  hear  just  as  He  did  His  prophet 
Elijah.  The  order  taken  by  the  Apostles  was  to  do 
away  with  the  excitement  of  miracle  or  faith  healing, 
and  substitute  a  regular  method  promulgated  by  the 
Church. 

There  was  also  a  further  reason.  The  priest  could 
deal  with  the  soul  as  a  faith-healing  or  miracle-work- 
ing layman  could  not.  If  the  body  was  to  be  cured, 
the  first  and  most  important  thing  for  its  recovery  was 
1  S.  Mark  vi.  13.  *  S.  James  v.  14,  15. 


232          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

to  bring  the  soul  into  harmony  with  God.  So  the 
sick  was  to  make  his  confession,  and  prayer  was  to 
be  made  over  him,  and  then  he  was  to  be  anointed. 
The  peace  and  healing  of  the  soul  would  aid  in  the 
healing  of  the  body. 

S.  James  uses  the  plural  form ;  "  Call,"  he  says, 
"  for  the  elders  of  the  Church."  Not  as  excluding 
the  ministrations  of  a  single  priest,  but  as  teaching  us 
the  efficacy  that  comes  from  united  prayer. 

The  anointing  is  not  to  be  used  when  illness  is  but 
trifling,  or  merely  when  the  person  is  in  extremis, 
but  when  any  illness  is  serious  we  may  resort  to  it, 
and  it  may  be  repeated. 

The  "  matter  "  of  this  mystery  is  the  anointing  of  the 
sick  person.  The  "  form  "  .is  the  prayer.  By  the 
anointing  God  is  recognized  as  the  giver  of  health. 
A  blessing  is  invoked  on  the  means  used  for  recovery, 
and  through  this  instrumentality  also,  if  God  so  wills, 
restorative  aid  is  given.  For  the  comfort  of  our  souls, 
grace  is  also  bestowed  to  meet  the  trials  and  tempta- 
tions of  illness.  Moreover,  the  soul,  when  passing,  is 
fortified  for  its  final  passage. 

Thus  by  unction  a  blessing  comes  for  the  healing 
of  our  bodies;  and  our  souls  are  calmed,  gladdened, 
refreshed,  and  fortified  by  a  special  gift  of  grace. 

"  In  death's  dark  vale  I  fear  no  ill 

With  Thee,  dear  Lord,  beside  me ; 
Thy  rod  and  staff  my  comfort  still, 

Thy  cross  before  to  guide  me. 
Thou  spread'st  a  table  in  my  sight ; 

Thy  unction  grace  bestovueth; 
And  oh,  what  transport  of  delight 

From  Thy  pure  chalice  floweth." 


THE   SEVEN   MYSTERIES  233 

The  two  next  mysteries  are  holy  orders  and  mar- 
riage. Holy  order  is  for  the  generation  and  preser- 
vation of  the  priesthood.  Marriage  was  ordained  for 
that  of  the  race.  Holy  order  is  indispensable  to  the 
existence  of  the  Church,  marriage  to  that  of  society. 
By  holy  order  a  spiritual  paternity  is  established 
between  priest  and  people ;  by  marriage  a  natural  one 
between  parent  and  children.  Order  is  for  the  ruling 
over  the  house  of  God ;  marriage  gives  headship  to 
the  Christian  family.  Order  provides  for  the  Church's 
spiritual  needs;  marriage  for  the  support  of  the 
family's  natural  wants.  Holy  order  secures  to  the 
Church  good  government;  marriage  is  for  the  preser- 
vation in  society  of  good  morals. 

We  have  already  spoken  sufficiently  of  holy  orders. 
Let  us  now  consider  marriage. 

It  has  existed  under  three  conditions  of  human 
society :  in  man's  state  of  innocence,  when  fallen  or 
apart  from  Christ,  and  under  the  Christian  dispen- 
sation. Each  has  its  own  separate  law  of  union.  We 
will  here  speak  of  it  only  in  its  last  condition. 

Christian  marriage  is  the  union  of  a  baptized  man 
and  woman.  Baptism  is  therefore  an  absolute  neces- 
sity, for  it  lies  at  the  foundation  of  this  as  of  all  other 
sacraments.  The  parties  must  be  baptized  into  Christ 
and  made  members  of  Christ  in  order  to  be  united 
together  "  in  the  Lord." 

They  must  also  be  of  legal  age,  not  devoid  of  rea- 
son, with  no  canonical  impediment  existing  by  reason 
of  affinity  or  consanguinity ;  must  be  free  in  their 
action,  and  not  under  grave  fear  or  constraint,  and 
neither  must  have  a  partner  by  a  former  marriage 
living. 


234          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

The  "  matter  "  of  the  sacrament  is  the  two  baptized 
persons  who  purpose,  and  are  capable,  by  canonical 
law,  of  making  a  free  and  mutual  choice.  The  "  form  " 
is  the  words  by  which,  in  the  presence  of  the  priest, 
they  take  one  another  to  be  man  and  wife,  and  to- 
gether receive  as  one  the  blessing  of  the  priest.  In  this 
way  they  are  united  in  matrimony  and  receive  an  in- 
crease of  sanctifying  grace,  and  also  the  special  grace 
needed  for  the  fulfilment  of  their  mutual  duties.  It 
is  a  grace  given  to  enable  them  to  live  in  love  and 
peace  together  "  until  death  do  us  part." 

To  this,  however,  it  has  been  objected  that  it  makes 
marriage  rest,  as  it  did  under  the  Roman  civil  law,  on 
contract,  and  if  by  mutual  consent  the  estate  is  created, 
by  mutual  consent,  as  in  Roman  times,  it  might  be 
dissolved.  But  the  consent  of  the  parties  here  is  not 
like  that  to  an  ordinary  civil  contract,  which  is  merely 
an  agreement  to  do  or  not  to  do  a  certain  thing.  It 
is  a  contract  which  executes  itself.  By  their  mutual 
agreement  the  wills  and  hearts  of  the  two  parties 
meet  and  are  thereby  joined  together.  Marriage, 
indeed,  implies  the  union  both  of  body  and  soul,  but 
the  soul  is  the  dominant  factor,  and  thus  the  parties 
before  leaving  the  church  are  what  the  priest  pro- 
nounces them  to  be,  man  and  wife. 

The  Church,  however,  does  not  recognize  the  char- 
acter of  indissolubility  as  attached  to  the  union  until 
it  has  been  wholly  consummated. 

This  union  being  a  sacramental  one  cannot  be  dis- 
solved by  civil  courts.  But  though  the  bond  cannot 
thus  be  broken,  a  separation  may  be  granted. 

The  unfaithfulness  of  a  partner  does  not  annul  the 


THE   SEVEN   MYSTERIES  235 

bond.  The  text  in  S.  Matthew  xix.  which  apparently 
favors  the  opposite  view  is  too  corrupt  or  uncertain 
to  allow  us  to  base  an  argument  upon  it.1  If  Christ's 
words  are  correctly  given  the  matter  still  remains  in 
doubt,  as  they  were  seemingly  addressed  to  the  Jews 
and  had  respect  to  marriage  in  their  case  only.  Even 
if  applicable  to  Christian  marriage  only  separation,  not 
remarriage,  is  allowed.  In  those  passages  where  our 
Lord  speaks  to  the  Apostles,  and  clearly  in  relation 
to  the  Christian  state,  no  provision  is  made  for  any 
dissolution  of  the  bond.  The  great  underlying  reason 
is  that  Christian  marriage  is  to  be  a  witness  of  the 
indissoluble  union  between  Christ  and  His  Church. 

The  hardness  and  suffering  thereby  entailed  on 
the  innocent  party  is  to  be  met  by  reliance  on  Christ's 
promise,  "  My  grace  is  sufficient  for  thee."  For 
marriage  is  not  to  be  considered  merely  in  relation 
to'our  earthly  state,  but  to  our  eternal  reward.  God 
calls  His  servants  to  suffer  in  various  ways,  all  of 
us  in  some  way.  And  when  our  sufferings  are  borne 
for  Him  the  soul  increases  in  sanctity  and  secures  an 
increment  of  future  bliss. 

There  are  three  kinds  of  Christian  marriage.  That 
of  the  laity,  of  the  priesthood,  and  that  of  those  con- 
secrated to  the  celibate  life  as  religious. 

The  first  is  to  bear  its  witness  unto  the  indissolu- 
bility  of  the  union  between  Christ  and  His  bride. 
The  second,  if  we  construe  Scripture  strictly,  allows 
of  but  one  marriage  to  the  bishop  or  priest.  As  the 
high  priest  under  the  old  dispensation  was  allowed 
to  marry  but  once,  and  that  a  virgin,  S.  Paul  makes 
1  Watkins,  "  Holy  Matrimony." 


236          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

the  same  ideal  the  standard  of  the  Christian  clergy. 
By  conformity  to  this  rule  they  bear  witness  to  the 
oneness  of  the  Church  as  the  bride  of  Christ 

The  mystical  marriage  of  those  consecrated  in 
religion  to  our  Lord  is  also  a  true  special  union  of 
the  soul  to  Him,  and,  more  powerfully  than  words  can 
tell,  bears  witness  to  the  world  of  the  all  sufficiency 
of  the  love  and  grace  of  the  Bridegroom. 

Of  the  latter  Dr.  Ptisey  has  said  : J  "  Blessed,  thrice 
blessed  they  whom  Christ  alone  sufficeth,  the  one  aim 
of  whose  being  is  to  live  to  Him  and  for  Him.  He  is 
their  light,  their  love,  their  holy  joy ;  to  Him  they 
ever  approach  with  trustfulness;  Him  they  consult 
in  all  things,  on  Him  they  wait;  Him  they  love,  and 
desiring  nothing  from  Him  but  His  love,  desire  no 
love  but  only  His.  '  I  am  my  Beloved's,  and  my 
Beloved  is  mine.' " 

Of  the  former  estate  he  says :  "  What  is  the 
pattern  and  measure  and  model  of  the  mutual  love 
of  the  husband  and  the  wife  ?  What  but  the  love 
of  Christ  Himself,  and  of  His  redeemed  Church  for 
Him,  its  Head  ?  " 

"  Love,  then,  with  a  tender,  forbearing  love,  as 
Christ  is  tender  and  compassionate  with  us ;  behold- 
ing us  as  what,  by  His  grace,  we  shall  one  day  be ; 
cherishing  one  another,  encouraging  one  another, 
helping  one  the  other  along  the  narrow  road  which 
leadeth  unto  Him;  denying  each  self  for  the  other, 
as  Christ  loved  our  souls  more  than  Himself.  This 
love  shall  grow  with  years,  as  the  love  of  Christ, 
which  is  the  beauty  of  the  soul,  grows  and  is  enlarged 

1  Sermon  on  the  Sacredness  of  Marriage. 


THE   SEVEN   MYSTERIES  237 

in  each.  This  love  shall  not  decay,  much  less  die. 
For  souls  which  are  united  in  Christ  shall  not  be 
separated  from  Christ;  they  shall  live  on  still-,  one 
in  the  one  love  of  Christ." 

"  Lord,  who  at  Cana's  wedding  feast 

Didst  as  a  guest  appear, 
Thou  dearer  far  than  earthly  guest, 

Vouchsafe  Thy  presence  here  ; 
For  holy  Thou  indeed  dost  prove 

The  marriage  vow  to  be, 
Proclaiming  it  a  type  of  love 

Between  the  Church  and  Thee. 
The  holiest  vow  that  man  can  make, 

The  golden  thread  in  life, 
The  bond  that  none  may  dare  to  break, 

That  bindeth  man  and  wife." 

The  Holy  Eucharist  is  the  greatest  of  all  mysteries. 
It  is  the  most  grand  and  worthy  of  honor  of  all 
the  sacraments ;  for  while  they  convey  grace,  in  the 
Eucharist  we  have  Jesus  Christ  Himself,  the  author 
of  grace.  It  is  an  ever-living  witness  of  the  incarna- 
tion, sacrificial  death,  resurrection,  and  ascension  of 
the  Lord.  It  is  the  consummation  of  religion  on 
earth,  as  it  affords  us  the  most  intimate  and  perpetual 
communication  with  Jesus  Christ.  It  is  the  essence 
of  Christianity,  as  being  the  sacrifice,  in  union  with 
which  the  Christian  makes  that  of  Calvary  applicable 
to  himself.  It  is  the  possession  of  the  Church  on 
earth  of  Jesus  Christ's  real  but  veiled  presence,  as 
she  waits  adoringly  for  His  unveiling  in  the  state  of 
glory. 

We  may  for  devotional  and  practical  purposes 
consider  the  mystery  under  three  heads: 


238          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

First,  as  a  witness.  The  sacraments  are  witnesses 
to  the  faith.  The  Blessed  Sacrament  bears  witness 
to  the  incarnation,  death,  and  resurrection  of  Jesus 
Christ,  and  the  oneness  of  the  Church  in  Him.  By 
the  necessary  recitation  of  the  words  of  institution, 
"  This  is  my  body,"  witness  is  thereby  borne  to  the 
fact  that  Christ  had  a  body  like  our  own.  Moreover, 
it  is  of  faith  that  He  assumed  it,  never  to  put  it  off. 
So  age  after  age  the  priest  repeats  these  words  at 
the  altar,  which,  if  Christ  had  ceased  to  have  a  body, 
would  not  be  true.  Also  by  the  consecration  of  the 
two  elements  the  mystery  tells  us  that  the  blood 
was  separated  from  the  body  by  a  sacrificial  death. 
"  This  cup  is  the  new  covenant  in  my  blood  poured 
out  for  you."  The  mystery  declares  yet  further  that 
He  who  died  rose  in  that  body,  for  otherwise  the 
words  of  the  institution  would  be  unreal.  It  more- 
over declares  as  well  as  effects  the  unity  of  the 
Church.  We  feed  on  Him,  the  living  bread,  and  are 
made  one  loaf  in  Him. 

The  sacrament  is  a  communion.  By  the  words  of 
institution  and  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit  the 
elements  become  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ. 
Man's  names  designate,  God's  naming  makes  that 
He  names.  It  is  not  made  in  the  natural  order,  or 
governed  by  any  natural  laws.  By  the  Spirit's  power 
the  elements  become  what  the  Word  declares  them 
to  be,  Christ's  body  and  blood. 

The  Anglican  Church  has  declared  this  as  her  faith 
and  embodied  it  in  her  catechism.  In  it  she  declares 
that  in  the  Blessed  Sacrament  there  is  an  outward 
part  or  sign,  and  there  is  an  inward  part  or  thing 


THE   SEVEN   MYSTERIES  239 

signified,  and  thirdly  there  are  the  benefits  which 
partakers  receive. 

First,  there  is  a  sign. 

At  the  time  of  the  Reformation  there  was  a  so-called 
Romish  theory  that  the  elements  existed  in  appear- 
ance only.  Our  theologians  met  this  error  by  saying, 
that  by  denying  the  existence  of  the  sign,  the  in- 
tegrity of  the  sacrament  was  fatally  impaired,  for  a 
sacrament  consists  both  of  an  inward  thing  and  an 
outward  sign.  On  the  other  hand,  some  within  the 
Church  have  mistaken  the  Church's  meaning,  and 
taught  that  the  inward  part  was  something  which 
only  signified  Christ.  In  this  way  they  have  fallen 
into  the  opposite  error  of  making  two  signs.  The 
outward  sign  being  one,  and  the  inward  part  being 
only  in  some  way  another  sign,  —  something  signify- 
ing Christ  and  not  being  the  real  body  and  blood  of 
our  Lord. 

There  are  three  opinions  held  respecting  this 
mystery.  Two  belong  to  the  Protestant  category. 
The  Zwinglian  makes  the  sacrament  merely  a 
memorial  of  an  absent  Lord ;  the  Calvinistic  view 
is  that  along  with  the  reception  of  the  elements 
Christ's  body  and  blood  are  communicated  to  the 
faithful  and  elect  receiver.  The  Catholic  belief  as 
stated  in  the  catechism  is  that  there  is  a  sign  and 
a  thing,  and  that  the  thing  signified  is  the  body 
and  blood  of  Christ. 

A  more  intelligent  apprehension  of  the  mystery ^of 
Christ's  presence  can  be  attained  by  considering 
three  points. 

First,  the  whole  transaction  takes  place  not  in  the 


240          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

natural  order  of  things,  but  in  the  spiritual  body  of 
Christ.  It  is  therefore  governed  by  no  natural  laws 
of  matter  and  space,  and  can  be  comprehended  by  no 
analogies  drawn  from  natural  life. 

Secondly,  by  the  consecration,  acting  through  His 
representatives,  Christ  gathers  up  the  elements  into 
Himself,  and  they  become  His  body  and  blood.  No 
local  movement  on  the  part  of  Christ  is  required  to 
effect  this.  The  elements  become  what  His  almighty 
word  declares  them  to  be,  and  receiving  them  with 
faith  we  partake  of  Him. 

Thirdly,  an  act  of  adoration  is  due  Him  from  the 
common  law  of  courtesy  which  demands  that  every 
act  of  condescension  on  the  part  of  a  superior  must 
be  acknowledged  by  a  reciprocal  act  of  reverence, 
and  in  case  the  superior  is  God,  of  adoration.  We 
do  not  adore  the  elements  considered  apart  by 
themselves,  but  our  act  of  adoration  has,  for  its 
terminus  ad  quern,  His  divine  personality,  to  whom 
alone  adoration  is  due. 

The  third  aspect  of  the  mystery  is,  that  it  is  a 
sacrifice.  Slowly  the  Anglican  Church  has  recovered 
its  grasp  on  this  great  truth.  The  Eucharistic  sacri- 
fice has  a  double  relation.  One  to  the  act  of  our 
Lord's  blood  shedding  finished  on  Calvary,  and  one 
to  the  presentation  of  that  blood,  which  has  passed 
through  death  to  the  Eternal  Father. 

On  Calvary  the  offering  was  made  in  behalf  and  in 
reconciliation  of  the  human  race.  On  the  altar  it 
is  re-presented,  pleaded,  and  appropriated  by  the 
Church  for  the  needs  of  her  individual  members. 

It  is,  however,  an  imperfect  apprehension  of  the 


THE   SEVEN   MYSTERIES  241 

truth  to  regard  the  sacrifice  of  the  altar  as  a  presenta- 
tion by  the  priest  of  Christ's  death,  apart  from  the 
co-operation  of  the  people.  The  deeper  and  fuller 
view  is  that  the  Church  offers  up  herself  as  a  living 
sacrifice  to  God.  She  does  this  in  union  with  Christ, 
her  head,  with  whom  she  identifies  herself,  by  par- 
taking of  the  sacrifice  of  the  altar. 

Most  glorious  would  it  be  if  on  every  altar  on 
Sundays  and  holy  days,  and  more  frequently  still, 
the  holy  sacrifice  was  offered.  The  earnestly  minded 
have  it  in  their  power  to  make  the  Anglican  Church 
what  they  desire.  But  it  is  not  by  mere  agitation, 
or  legislation,  or  change  of  relationship  to  the  State, 
or  in  any  like  ways,  will  they  attain  their  end.  It  is 
God  and  God  only  who  can  bring  about  the  desired 
result,  and  the  most  potent  of  all  agencies  which 
move  Him  is  the  devout  offering  of  the  holy 
sacrifice. 

"  Thou,  who  at  thy  first  Eucharist  didst  pray, 
That  all  Thy  Church  might  be  forever  one, 

Grant  us  at  every  Eucharist  to  say 

With  longing  heart  and  soul,  '  Thy  will  be  done.' 

Oh,  may  we  all  one  Bread,  one  Body  be, 

Through  this  blest  Sacrament  of  Unity. 

"  We  pray  Thee,  too,  for  wanderers  from  Thy  fold  ; 

Oh,  bring  them  back,  good  Shepherd  of  the  sheep, 
Back  to  the  faith  which  saints  believed  of  old, 

Back  to  the  Church  which  still  that  faith  doth  keep ; 
Soon  may  we  all  one  Bread,  one  Body  be, 
Through  this  blest  Sacrament  of  Unity." 


16 


CHAPTER   XIII 

UNITY    AND    UNION 

HAPPY  is  that  day  to  any  devout  soul  when  the 
bright  vision  of  the  Catholic  Church,  as  the 
eternal  and  glorious  bride  of  Christ,  dawns  upon  it. 
The  soul  is  lifted  up  out  of  the  narrow  and  contracted 
technicalities  of  theological  disputation,  and  is  bathed 
in  the  divine  sunlight,  and  with  the  blessed  saints 
and  angels  rejoices  in  God. 

There  are  three  degrees  of  apprehension  of  Chris- 
tianity. First,  it  is  seen  to  be  a  spiritual  power 
within  men.  This  is  the  strictly  sectarian  view.  But 
Christianity  was  not  only  like  a  grain  of  mustard  seed 
or  leaven  within  the  measures  of  meal.  It  came  into 
the  world  as  an  organization.  The  gospel  that 
Christ  preached  was  the  "  gospel  of  the  kingdom." 
It  was  not  only  a  truth  or  influence.  It  was  these 
embodied  and  organized.  It  was  like  unto  a  walled 
city,  a  visible  temple,  a  kingdom. 

Next,  it  becomes  apparent  that  this  city,  temple, 
kingdom,  was  divinely  founded  and  established.  It 
was  not  a  mere  voluntary  association  of  believers.  It 
did  not  spring  up  like  a  human-made  society.  It  was 
an  organization  founded  by  Christ  with  its  officers 
and  sacraments.  This  is  the  aspect  that  is  much 
dwelt  on  by  Romans,  but  it  is  also  an  imperfect  one. 
For,  to  confine  our  vision  exclusively  to  this  last 


UNITY  AND  UNION  243 

view  is  like  a  scientist,  who,  having  to  describe  the 
earth  should  fit  himself  for  the  task  by  throwing  him- 
self flat  on  its  surface,  and  then,  after  applying  his 
eye  closely  to  it,  should  give  us  as  the  result  of  his 
investigation  concerning  the  planet  a  description  of 
the  structure  and  activities  of  an  ant  hill.  In  like 
manner,  those  who  confine  their  view  of  the  Church 
to  it  as  existing  only  on  this  world  see  but  a  very 
small  part  of  it.  It  seems  to  them  a  very  perfect 
organization  indeed.  But  it  is  not  the  whole  Church. 
In  respect  to  it,  the  papacy  is  only  an  ant  hill. 

There  is  a  third,  a  fuller  and  more  complete  view. 
It  does  not  confine  its  vision  to  the  Church  on  earth. 
It  takes  on  a  far  wider  horizon.  It  begins  with  Christ. 
He  is  not  apart  from  His  Church.  He  is  the  head 
of  it.  He  is  the  sun  of  this  system  of  light  and  life. 
He  is  reigning  now  in  glory.  He  is  surrounded  by 
His  multitudinous  cohorts  of  angels  and  the  innum- 
erable company  of  His  saints.  Besides  these  there  is 
that  vast  number  of  souls  in  the  purificative  or  ex- 
pectant sphere  of  advancement.  Lastly,  there  is  that 
small  number  who  are  as  yet  wayfarers,  and  confined 
to  the  earthly  state  of  trial.  These  three  groups,  in 
their  triumphant,  expectant,  militant  conditions  make 
up  the  one,  holy,  catholic  and  apostolic  Church. 
This  is  the  Church  Christ  founded  and  which  is  to 
endure  throughout  eternity.  It  is  a  vast  spiritual 
organism  whose  centre  is  Christ,  whose  life-giving 
atmosphere  is  the  Holy  Ghost. 

Now  what  is  the  principle  of  unity  which  makes 
and  keeps  the  Church  one? 

Here  we  must  discriminate  between  the  two  ideas 


244          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

of  unity  and  union.  "  Unity  "  denotes  the  oneness 
of  the  body.  "  Union  "  the  co-operation  of  the  mem- 
bers of  it.  The  first  requires  a  principle  that  makes 
the  body  one.  The  second  a  law  that  will  regulate 
co-operation ;  both  need  the  assisting  power  of  the 
Holy  Ghost. 

We  must  then  first  solve  the  question,  What  is 
the  principle  of  the  Church's  unity?  The  Roman 
theory  makes  the  unity  to  depend  upon  subjection 
to  the  Western  patriarch  or  bishop  of  Rome.  The 
other,  and  which  we  deem  the  Catholic  theory,  makes 
the  principle  of  unity  our  sacramental  union  with 
Jesus  Christ,  the  Church's  head.  Which  theory  is 
the  correct  one? 

For  the  argument's  sake,  let  us  put  the  Church 
aside  and  ask  in  what  does  the  principle  of  any  body 
consist? 

There  are  three  very  obvious  axioms  which  we 
may  here  apply.  First,  the  principle  of  unity  of 
any  body  must  be  coterminous  with  the  body  itself. 
The  principle,  so  to  say,  which  makes  an  apple  one 
thing  must  be  a  principle  which  affects  every  atom 
of  its  composition.  Likewise  the  principle  which 
unites  and  makes  the  Church  one  must  be  a  prin- 
ciple which  lays  hold  of  and  affects  every  member 
of  the  Catholic  Church.  It  must  be  a  principle  oper- 
ating at  one  and  the  same  time  upon  the  ever  Blessed 
Virgin,  the  Blessed  Mother  of  God,  upon  all  the 
saints  in  glory,  upon  all  the  waiting  expectant  souls, 
and  all  the  members  of  the  Church  militant.  Thus 
tested,  the  principle  of  submission  to  the  papacy  is 
seen  not  to  be  a  principle  of  unity,  because  it  affects 


UNITY  AND   UNION  245 

only  one  portion  of  the  Church,  namely,  that  on  the 
earth,  and  not  the  whole  of  it. 

Next  it  must  be  admitted  that  any  true  principle 
of  unity  of  a  body  must  be  by  its  own  nature  as  last- 
ing as  the  body  itself.  The  principle  of  unity  con- 
sequently, of  a  body  that  is  endowed  with  an  eternal 
existence  as  the  Church  is,  must  be  itself  eternal. 
As  the  papacy  finally  and  before  long  must  pass 
away  with  this  earth,  it  is  clearly  seen  that  it  cannot 
be  in  itself  the  principle  of  unity  of  a  body,  which  by 
its  nature  is  of  eternal  duration. 

Again,  the  principle  of  unity  of  any  body  must  be 
as  indestructible  as  the  body  it  proposes  to  unite  in 
oneness.  Now  history  reveals  the  fact  that  there 
have  been  at  times  two  or  three  rival  popes  excom- 
municating one  another.  For  about  seventy  years 
different  nations  in  Europe  were  under  different 
popes.  For  several  generations  the  faithful  could 
not  know  which  was  the  pope  if  there  was  to  be  but 
one.  Also  in  consequence  of  its  claimed  supremacy 
the  four  patriarchates  of  the  East  became  separated 
from  that  of  Rome.  In  Russia  alone  there  are  one 
hundred  millions  of  Catholics  to-day.  The  papacy 
is  thus  seen  not  to  have  secured  unity,  but  really  to 
have  been  the  source  of  disunion. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  Catholic  principle  of  unity 
applies  to  the  whole  body  of  the  Church  wherever 
any  of  its  members  may  be,  and  it  will  last  as  long  as 
the  Church  lasts,  and  it  is  in  itself  indestructible.  It 
is  like  the  unity  that  binds  a  family  together.  A 
family  is  one  because  the  same  common  life  is  to  be 
found  in  all  its  members.  A  family  may  quarrel  and 


246          CHRISTIAN    AND   CATHOLIC 

become  a  disunited  family,  but  the  blood  relation 
which  unites  its  members  is  indestructible.  Thus  it 
is  in  the  Church  of  Christ.  Christ  prayed  that  His 
Church  should  be  one  as  He  and  the  Father  are  one. 
Now  they  are  one  by  unity  of  nature,  and  that  prayer 
was  answered.  For  though  the  members  of  the 
Christian  family  have  fallen  out,  and  intercommunion 
has  been  interrupted,  yet  the  Church,  united  in  all 
its  parts  to  Christ  by  sacramental  grace,  is  one.  All 
the  members  having  Christ's  life  in  them  are  united 
to  one  another.  Neither  the  gates  of  hell,  nor  the 
powers  of  evil,  nor  the  quarrels  of  churchmen  can 
prevail  against  it.  The  Anglican  Church,  possessed 
of  sacramental  grace,  is  possessed  of  the  true  principle 
of  unity. 

The  prayer  of  Christ  also  was  for  union  as  well  as 
unity.  He  prayed  the  Father  that  His  followers 
might  "  be  one  in  us :  that  the  world  might  believe 
that  Thou  hast  sent  me." 

Now  as  the  principle  of  organic  unity  is  the  com- 
mon participation  in  the  nature  of  Christ,  so  the  liv- 
ing bond  of  the  Church's  union  is  not  submission  to 
the  papacy,  but  to  the  rule  and  guidance  of  the  Holy 
Ghost;  for  union  no  more  than  unity  is  preserved 
by  subordination  to  an  earthly  head.  This  indeed  is 
man's  way.  It  is  the  principle  of  human  organiza- 
tions. It  is,  however,  the  principle  condemned  by 
our  Lord  as  applicable  to  His  Apostles.  He  said, 
"  Ye  know  that  the  princes  of  the  Gentiles  exercise 
dominion  over  them,  and  they  that  are  great  exercise 
authority  upon  them.  But  it  shall  not  be  so  among 
you."  They  were  indeed  to  sit  on  thrones  judging 

1  S.  Matt.  xx.  25. 


UNITY  AND   UNION  247 

the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel,  but  among  themselves  the 
only  title  to  greatness  was  not  authority  over  their 
brethren,  but  servitude.  "  Whosoever  will  be  chief 
among  you,  let  him  be  your  servant." 1  The  relation  be- 
tween the  Apostles  and  their  spiritual  children  did  not 
prohibit  the  use  of  the  term  "  father,"  but  as  among 
themselves  our  Lord  forbade  the  calling  of  any  one 
"  father"  or  "  master."  It  is  this  forbidden  spirit  of 
"  exercising  authority,"  like  a  worldly  monarch,  that 
has  in  the  papacy  rent  Christendom  and  marred  the 
union  for  which  Christ  prayed. 

The  erection  of  the  papacy  with  its  monarchical 
absolutism  has  been  the  great  sin  of  Christendom. 
It  has  been  the  outcome  of  human  wisdom,  and  is  a 
rebellion  against  Christ.  In  this  sense  the  papacy  is 
anti-Christ.  Just  as  Israel  sinned  by  not  being  con- 
tent without  having  a  visible  head,  so  the  Roman 
Church  has  sinned  likewise,  and  with  the  same  result. 
What  Israel  thought  would  be  for  the  protection  and 
greatness  of  the  State  led  to  its  disruption.  Men 
endeavored,  mistaking  Christ's  teaching,  to  make  a 
better  Church  than  Christ  had  made.  What  they 
thought  would  secure  its  union  led  to  its  divisions. 

The  true  principle  or  bond  of  union  in  the  Church 
is  divine  love,  the  love  that  is  effective  through  the 
indwelling  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  This  is  seen  in  Christ's 
prayer  for  union.  Christ  prayed  that  His  Apostles 
might  "be  one,  even  as  we  are  one:  I  in  them  and 
Thou  in  me."  The  bond  which  holds  the  Blessed 
Trinity  in  unity  is  the  living  bond  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 
He  was  to  be  the  bond  of  union  in  His  Church.  So 

1  S.  Matt.  xx.  27. 


248         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

held  together,  the  world  would  witness  a  supernatural 
union,  one  which  would  bear  witness  to  the  love  of 
the  Father  and  the  Son.  It  was  to  be  the  sight  of 
this  union  that  was  to  lead  the  world  to  believe  "  that 
Thou  hast  sent  Me."  In  the  monarchical  principle  of 
the  papacy  no  witness  is  given  to  the  love  of  the 
Father  for  the  Son.  The  union  it  enforces  is  a  human- 
made  one  of  a  mechanical  order  and  has  nothing  of  a 
divine  or  supernatural  character  to  it.  Such  a  union 
has  no  power  to  lead  men  to  believe  in  the  unseen 
or  the  mission  of  Christ.  But  union  preserved  by  lov- 
ing subordination  to  one  another,  and  where  none 
claims  to  be  the  greatest,  bears  a  fruitful  witness  to 
the  supernatural  and  the  mission  of  Christ. 

Do  we  ask  how  the  Holy  Ghost  effects  a  union  in 
faith  and  fellowship?  The  Holy  Spirit  dwells  in  the 
Church  and  expresses  His  mind  in  the  Ecumenical 
councils.  They  define  the  faith  and  give  the  law  to 
the  Church.  Union  between  the  members  of  the 
episcopate  and  the  various  portions  of  Christendom 
is  provided  for  by  subordination  to  the  law  of  the 
whole  body.  And  fellowship  is  cemented  by  the 
divine  charity  that  binds  them  in  loving  subordination 
and  co-operation  together.  Thus  was  the  Church 
united  before  the  popes  claimed  absolute  dominion. 
The  same  bond  to-day  holds  the  Russian  and  the 
Constantinople  churches  together.  It  unites  in  one 
communion  the  various  branches  of  the  Anglican 
Church.  It  could  unite  all. 

Had  it  not  been  for  the  papacy  the  Church  would 
have  remained  united.  But  what  our  Lord  and  the 
Apostles  warned  us  against  has  come  to  pass.  The 


UNITY   AND   UNION  249 

gates  of  hell  have  not  prevailed  against  the  Church, 
but  she  has  been  wounded.  That  which  depended 
on  Christ's  own  making,  i.  e.,  unity,  came  to  pass ; 
that  which  depended  on  us,  i.  e.,  union,  has  been  in- 
jured. Unity  has  not  been  broken,  but  union  has 
been  suspended.  The  inner  garment  of  Christ  has 
not  been  rent,  but  the  outer  one  has.  The  net  that 
secures  the  saved  is  not  broken,  but  the  one  in  earthly 
service  has  been  rent.  Not  a  bone  of  His  mystical 
body  is  broken,  but  all  the  bones  are  out  of  joint. 
The  earthly  visible  organization  of  the  Church  has, 
according  to  the  type  in  the  final  chapter  of  the  Acts, 
suffered  shipwreck,  though  each  soul  by  the  saving 
wood  of  the  cross  comes  safe  to  land.  An  enemy 
hath  sown  tares  in  Christ's  field  and  the  tares  and 
wheat  must  grow  together  till  He  come.  It  is  observ- 
able that  the  gospel  prophecy  of  the  earthly  future 
of  Christianity  is  hardly  what  we  should  have  expected 
it  beforehand  to  be;  there  is  a  great  absence  of 
brightness  in  it;  the  sky  is  overcast  with  clouds,  and 
birds  of  evil  omen  fly  to  and  fro.  Prophecy  would 
fain  presage  auspiciously,  but  as  soon  as  she  casts  her 
eye  forward  her  note  saddens,  and  the  chords  issue 
in  melancholy  and  sinister  cadences.1  Christ  Him* 
self  prophesied  that  at  the  end  there  would  be  false 
Christs  and  false  prophets,  false  signs  and  wonders, 
the  moon  would  not  give  its  light  and  the  stars  would 
fall  and  the  powers  of  heaven  be  shaken.  The  Church 
also  as  the  bride  of  Christ  must  pass  through  a  life 
like  her  Lord's,  and  at  last  the  world  will  treat  her 
as  it  did  Him.  Be  it  ours  not  to  desert  our  posts, 

1  Mozley,  University  Sermons. 


250         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

but  to  abide  with  the  ever  Blessed  Mother  and  S.  John, 
faithful  to  Jesus  and  His  cross,  one  in  Him  by  grace, 
united  to  one  another  by  love. 

Anglican  Catholics  have  three  duties  to  perform 
to  the  Church :  one  to  the  Church  militant,  another 
to  the  Church  expectant,  and  another  to  the  Church 
in  glory. 

A  duty  incumbent  upon  every  member  of  the 
Catholic  Church  militant  is  to  work  for  its  extension. 
A  missionary  zeal  should  burn  like  fire  in  every 
Christian's  heart.  The  time  is  short  and  the  second 
coming  of  Christ  draweth  nigh.  In  all  ways  in  our 
power,  by  our  alms  and  prayers  and  personal  service, 
we  must  labor  to  "  press  on  the  kingdom."  Knowing 
too  that  the  Church's  spiritual  power  lies  in  the  co- 
operation of  all  her  members,  valiant  effort  should  be 
made  for  the  restoration  of  intercommunion  and 
Christian  fellowship,  especially  between  the  Eastern 
and  the  Anglican  communions. 

One  of  the  most  important  steps  in  the  attainment 
of  these  ends  is  the  deepening  of  the  spiritual  life  in 
our  own  Church,  the  re-establishment  of  our  religious 
orders  and  the  recovery  for  her  of  her  Catholic  heri- 
tage of  faith,  practice,  and  worship.  What  nobler 
work  can  man  or  woman  do  than  to  give  themselves 
up  to  this  service?  By  it  the  most  effective  victory 
for  Christ  can  be  won.  The  fire  of  self-sacrifice 
should  kindle  in  every  heart.  To  live  and  die  for 
Jesus  is  the  watchword  of  Catholic  saints.  Let  it 
be  ours. 

The  intellectual  quagmire  into  which  some  honest 
and  good  Anglican  clergy  fall,  is  to  assume  that  the 


UNITY   AND    UNION  251 

Anglican  Church  has  a  mind  of  her  own  apart  from 
the  whole  Catholic  body.  While  this  is  right  and 
true  in  a  measure,  it  is  not  true  in  respect  of 
matters  of  faith  or  practice  determined  by  Ecumen- 
ical authority. 

Again,  it  may  be  very  interesting  to  study  the 
history  of  the  Reformation  period,  but  the  private 
opinions  or  wishes  of  the  reformers  are  absolutely 
worthless  in  determining  what  morally  or  legally  is 
the  teaching  of  our  Church.  Legally,  for  any  law 
enacted  by  a  body  of  men  cannot  be  interpreted  by 
the  private  intentions  or  opinions  of  its  framers,  but 
by  its  words  alone.  Morally,  for  two  reasons :  those 
who  compiled  our  formularies  were,  unlike  an  ordinary 
body  of  legislators,  an  ecclesiastical  one,  under  the 
guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  used  them  to  ex- 
press His  mind  and  not  their  own.  Again,  morally, 
for  if  the  Church  is  Catholic  as  she  claims  to  be  (and 
to  doubt  it  would  prove  us  disloyal),  we  are  bound 
in  honor  to  her  to  interpret  her  prayer-book  and 
formularies  in  correspondence  with  the  teaching  of 
the  whole  body  of  Christ. 

Hence  it  is  the  duty  of  the  bishops  to  voice  the 
teaching  of  the  solidarity  of  the  episcopate,  as  heard 
from  the  beginning,  and  not  to  give  out  as  authori- 
tative their  own  private  opinions  based  on  their  own 
interpretations  of  Holy  Scripture  or  the  book  of 
common  prayer.  Hence  it  is  the  duty  of  the  laity 
to  listen  to  their  bishops  so  speaking  to  them,  and 
obey  their  godly  admonitions ;  and  for  the  different 
schools  to  try  the  better  to  understand  one  another, 
and  to  draw  closer  together  in  mutual  forbearance, 


252         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

and  so  to  "  press  on  the  kingdom."  Not  seeking  to 
make  it  large  by  making  it  popular,  for  orthodoxy 
and  sanctity  are  more  important  than  numbers,  and 
the  restoration  of  the  Church's  catholicity  is  more  im- 
portant than  the  preservation  of  any  church's  national 
character.  The  Church  is  in  the  world  not  to  save 
the  world,  but  to  save  men  out  of  the  world  and  make 
ready  a  people  prepared  for  the  Lord. 

Our  duty  to  the  Church  expectant  is  to  pray  for 
the  faithful  departed.  After  death,  we  know,  comes 
the  judgment.  There  will  be,  indeed,  a  final  judgment 
when  every  man  will  receive  according  as  his  work 
hath  been.  This  final  judgment  is  for  the  glory  of 
Christ  and  the  reward  of  the  faithful.  The  particular 
judgment  at  the  time  of  death  determines  our  safety 
or  our  eternal  loss.  It  turns  on  the  condition  whether 
we  die  in  a  state  of  grace  or  not.  But  though  dying 
in  grace  most  souls  are  unfitted  for  immediate  entrance 
into  glory ;  for  without  holiness  no  man  can  see  the 
Lord.1  The  soul  that  after  death  happily  finds  itself 
among  the  saved  is  secured  from  falling  away  by  its 
deliverance  from  temptations.  But  as  it  cannot,  as 
when  here,  resist  temptation  and  thereby  grow  in 
grace,  it  must  be  purified  by  God's  disciplinary  and 
loving  remedial  processes.  In  this  it  is  aided  by  the 
offering  of  the  holy  sacrifice  and  the  suffrages  of  the 
faithful.  The  decline  of  prayers  for  the  dead,  which 
our  Lord  we  may  say  Himself  practised,  and  which 
has  ever  been  a  custom  of  Catholic  Christendom, 
largely  led  in  the  last  century  to  unbelief  in  a  future 
state.  It  is  a  defect  that  our  liturgy  so  little  recog- 
nizes this  duty.  But  parents  should  teach  their  chil- 

1  Heb.  xii.  14. 


UNITY  AND   UNION  253 

dren  to  pray  for  those  of  their  family  departed. 
Priests  should  likewise  teach  the  people  to  remember 
them,  for  in  the  liturgy  we  pray  not  only  for  our- 
selves, "  but  for  the  whole  Church,"  which  includes 
the  dead  as  well  as  the  living. 

"  Oh,  pray  for  us,"  our  dear  departed  ones  may  be 
presumed  to  say;  "Oh,  pray  for  us  who  loved  and 
labored  and  who  prayed  for  you."  Let  us  never 
forget  them  before  God.  Let  us  pray  that  their 
souls,  accepted  for  the  merits  of  Christ,  may  rest  in 
peace.  May  their  stains  and  wounds  made  by  sin 
be  all  removed ;  may  they  be  perfected  in  Christ, 
and  continually  advance  in  joy  and  felicity  till  they 
reach  in  heaven  the  sight  of  God  and  are  filled  with 
His  bliss. 

What  is  our  duty  to  the  Church  triumphant  and  the 
saints  in  glory? 

The  answer  is  to  be  found  in  the  principle  that 
binds  the  whole  Church  together  in  its  united  action, 
and  that  principle  is  love.  As  it  is  of  the  essence  of 
love  that  it  must  manifest  itself  by  external  action, 
love  expresses  itself  in  the  Church  by  the  mutual 
prayers  of  all  the  members  for  one  another.  There/ 
can  be  no  such  thing  as  common  prayer  between! 
Christians  without  mutual  prayer.  No  Christian  can 
say  the  Lord's  Prayer  for  himself  alone,  for  that 
prayer  embraces  in  its  petition,  "  Thy  kingdom 
come,"  not  only  himself  and  his  brethren  on  earth, 
but  even  the  Mother  of  God  and  all  the  saints.  So 
the  saints  in  their  desire  for  the  increase  of  Christ's 
kingdom  pray  for  us,  and  we,  desirous  of  their 
increase  in  bliss,  pray  for  them. 


254         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

As  the  Church's  worship  is  the  worship  of  the 
whole  body,  it  is  engaged  in  one  united  act  of  praise 
and  prayer.  In  its  magnificent  development  the 
choirs  of  angels  and  the  saints  call  upon  one  another 
to  unite  in  magnifying  God  and  exalting  and  praising 
Him  forever.  So  the  Church  on  earth  calls  on  all 
creatures  animate  and  inanimate,  all  the  holy  and 
humble-hearted,  and  all  the  spirits  and  souls  of  the 
righteous  to  bless  the  Lord.  It  is  in  realization  of 
this  united  worship  that  we  both  pray  for  the  saints 
and  call  on  them,  collectively  and  individually,  to 
pray  for  us. 

From  exaggerations  developed  in  the  Latin  Church 
whereby  the  Blessed  Virgin  was  declared  the  neck 
of  the  mystical  body  through  whom  all  graces  pass, 
and  saints  were  appealed  to  as  sources  of  spiritual 
gifts,  the  Anglican  Church  revolted.  Here,  as  in 
some  other  ways,  the  Reformation  was  a  return 
towards  eastern  orthodoxy.  For  the  East  recogniz- 
ing the  oneness  of  all  the  members  in  Christ,  prays 
for  all  the  saints,  even  the  Blessed  Mother  of  God, 
as  well  as  invokes  their  prayers.  In  her  high  con- 
ception of  prayer  she  regards  all  the  prayers  of  the 
Church,  past,  present,  and  future,  as  rising  up  before 
God  as  one  united  intercession,  in  response  to  which, 
the  God-bestowed  grace  came  to  the  Blessed  Mother 
and  to  all  the  saints.  The  neglect  of  this  pious  de- 
votion on  our  part  may  help  to  explain  our  feebler 
grasp  of  the  supernatural  and  the  oneness  of  Christ's 
mystical  body. 

Under  the  light  of  modern  science  the  old  ob- 
jection as  to  how  the  saints  can  hear  us  is  now  but 


UNITY  AND   UNION  255 

little  urged.  It  is  recognized  that  the  spiritual  world 
is  controlled  by  laws  of  its  own.  And  if  man  can 
send  messages  by  wireless  telegraphy  across  an 
ocean,  what  cannot  be  accomplished  by  angels  in 
their  sphere?  In  any  event  God  hears  our  prayers 
and  can  reveal  them  directly  to  His  saints.  But 
partly  from  our  Anglican  insulation,  partly  from  a 
reverent  fear,  some  of  our  theologians  have  dis- 
couraged the  practice  as  being  a  dangerous  one. 

Against  this,  however,  it  is  to  be  replied  that  the 
custom  is  not  more  dangerous  than  many  others 
which  the  Catholic  Church  approves,  as,  for  instance, 
prayers  for  the  dead.  There  has  never  been  any- 
thing in  the  practice  of  invoking  the  saints  to  equal 
the  shameful  traffic  in  masses  which  grew  out  of 
prayers  for  the  departed.  If  we  are  to  reject  prac- 
tices because  of  their  developed  harmful  results, 
prayers  for  the  dead  have  been  the  occasion  of 
greater  harm  than  invocation  of  the  saints.  Yet 
there  are  those  who  oppose  the  invocation  of  saints 
who  are  most  anxious  to  have  prayers  for  the  dead 
restored.  If  one  practice  can  be  safeguarded  and 
rightly  used,  so  can  the  other. 

No  book,  as  Liddon  pointed  out,  has  been  more 
abused  and  made  the  source  of  more  error  or  the 
cover  of  more  wickedness  than  the  Bible.  Shall  we 
therefore  dissolve  our  Bible  societies  and  cease  to 
urge  the  reading  of  the  Scriptures? 

The  truth  is  that  there  is  no  doctrine  or  practice 
of  the  Catholic  Church  which  the  evil  mind  of  man 
has  not  at  some  time  corrupted,  and  if  we  were  to 
give  up  all  such  doctrines  and  practices  we  should 


256        CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

lapse  into  Theism.  Therefore,  we  conclude  a  practice 
is  not  necessarily  to  be  given  up  because  it  is  dan- 
gerous, but  the  abuse  being  cut  away  it  is  to  be 
restored  to  what  it  was  when  it  obtained  the  sanction 
of  the  Church. 

It  has  also  been  urged  that  a  National  Church  has 
a  right  to  alter  practices  which  have  been  found 
dangerous. 

Now  it  is  observed  that  practices  are  either  good, 
bad,  or  indifferent.  A  good  practice  is  that  which 
is  founded  upon  some  orthodox  doctrine,  a  bad 
practice  is  that  which  is  founded  on  some  heterodox 
doctrine,  an  indifferent  practice  is  one  which  is  either 
founded  upon  some  pious  opinion,  or  which  has  been 
introduced  from  mere  motives  of  reverence. 

Of  this  latter  sort  it  is  to  be  observed,  that  a 
National  Church  may  remove  them  at  pleasure. 
She  can  "  change  and  abolish  ceremonies  and  rites 
ordained  only  by  man's  authority."  Of  the  second 
kind,  while  a  National  Church  might  fall  into  the 
error  of  a  practice  based  on  false  doctrine,  yet  it  is 
impossible  for  the  whole  Church  to  do  so.  Other- 
wise Christ's  promise  concerning  her  would  fail. 
When,  however,  an  error  in  practice  or  by  neglect 
is  discovered,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  National  Church 
to  correct  its  judgment  by  that  of  the  whole  Church. 
Concerning  those  practices  which  are  good  and  have 
had  the  indorsement  of  the  whole  Church,  a  national 
one  has  no  power  to  abolish  them.  To  do  so  would 
be  an  assertion  of  its  own  independence  of  the  body 
of  Christ  and  involve  rejection  of  the  Spirit's  authority 
and  guidance. 


UNITY   AND   UNION  257 

Now  it  is  a  doctrine  of  faith  and  the  tradition  of 
the  Catholic  Church  that  the  saints  pray  for  us,  and 
secondly,  the  invocation  of  saints  is  founded  on  this 
doctrine.  The  Fathers  of  the  fourth  century  found 
the  practice  well  established  in  their  day,  a  practice 
which,  so  far  as  we  know,  antedated  the  direct  invo- 
cation of  the  third  person  of  the  most  Holy  Trinity. 
It  extended  throughout  the  whole  Church  East  and 
West.  It  was  universal  throughout  Christendom 
till  the  Reformation.  It  is  the  custom  now  of  some 
three  hundred  and  seventy  out  of  the  estimated  four 
hundred  millions  of  Christians.  Since,  then,  this 
is  not  founded  upon  man's  authority  alone  and  so 
practice  may  be  changed,  but  is  founded  upon 
a  Catholic  doctrine,  and  is  one  approved  by  the 
Holy  Spirit  acting  through  the  Christian  conscious- 
ness, it  is  a  good  practice ;  and  as  such  no  National 
Church  is  competent  to  abolish  it  without  falling 
into  the  initial  error  of  Romanism,  namely,  rebellion 
against  the  whole  Church  and  the  Holy  Spirit  of 
God. 

While  a  church  may  not  condemn  or  abolish  a 
good  practice,  it  can  rightly  do  away  with  any  abuses 
that  may  have  grown  up  about  it,  and  this  is  what  our 
reformers  did.  They  rejected  the  Romish  doctrine 
of  invocation  of  saints,  but  not  the  Catholic  doctrine. 
And  if  under  the  stress  of  the  times  or  unfortunate 
continental  influences  they  omitted  invocations  from 
the  public  offices,  this  practice  was  not  forbidden, 
and  in  her  religious  houses  and  among  an  increasing 
number  of  the  faithful  it  still  survives. 


258         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

Let  us  carefully  teach  the  true  and  full  doctrine  of 
the  communion  of  saints.  Let  us  avoid  the  error  of 
Rome  that  there  are  two  distinct  classes  of  the  de- 
parted, one  of  which  is  to  be  prayed  to  and  the  other 
prayed  for.  Let  us  with  the  holy  Eastern  Churches 
realize  the  union  in  worship  with  all  members  of 
Christ's  body,  and  that  any  soul  that  can  be  prayed 
for,  the  prayers  of  that  soul  may  be  asked.  Let  us, 
give  as  a  reason  why  certain  saints  are  invoked  in 
public  worship  is  not  because  they  belong  to  a  differ- 
ent class  from  the  rest  of  the  holy  souls,  but  only  be- 
cause their  eminent  sanctity  has  given  them  a  wider 
reputation  and  a  greater  nearness  to  God.  Let  us, 
while  we  invoke  their  prayers,  also  pray,  "  Almighty 
God,  increase,  we  beseech  Thee,  the  bliss  and  glory 
of  the  Blessed  Virgin  Mary  and  all  saints."  So  will 
our  devotions  be  like  those  of  the  Church  in  early 
times,  and  as  it  is  now  in  those  orthodox  Churches 
of  the  East  in  whom  the  faith  has  been  so  wonder- 
fully preserved,  unharmed  by  the  evils  of  ultramon- 
tane or  Protestant  error.  The  revival  of  the  recitation 
of  the  Angelus  would  tend  to  strengthen  the  faith  of 
the  Anglican  Church  in  the  glorious  mystery  of  the 
Incarnation,  and  make  more  real  to  her  children  the 
vision  of  the  saints  in  glory.  We  are  surrounded 
by  a  great  cloud  of  witnesses.  They  look  down 
upon  us  in  our  struggle  from  their  thrones  in  glory. 
The  departed  worthies  and  saints  of  the  Anglican 
Church  are  sending  up  their  ardent  intercessions  in 
our  behalf.  They  see  more  clearly  now  than  ever 
that  the  success  of  Christendom  depends  on  the 


UNITY  AND   UNION  259 

catholization  of  the  Anglican  Church.  Let  us  be 
willing  to  live  and  suffer  and  die  for  the  Catholic 
cause.  And  as  we  pray  for  them  who  are  at  rest, 
let  us  also  energetically  follow  their  examples  and 
ask  their  prayers. 

"  Made  coheirs  with  Christ  in  glory, 

His  celestial  bliss  they  share; 
May  they  now  before  Him  bending, 
Help  us  onward  by  their  prayer." 


Part   Three 


CATHOLIC,    NOT   ROMAN 


CHAPTER   XIV 

S.   PETER'S   PRE-EMINENCE 

THERE  comes  a  time  to  most  Catholics  when 
in  some  form  the  claims  of  Rome  are  presented 
to  them.  They  can  be  presented  most  attractively 
and  they  appeal  to  many  sides  of  our  religious 
nature.  The  Roman  church  is  a  sister  one  to  the 
Anglican  and  to  the  churches  of  the  East,  and  shares 
in  the  glories  of  a  common  Catholicity.  It  would  be 
churlish  and  disingenuous  not  to  admit  that  she  has 
special  glories  of  her  own. 

We  willingly  acknowledge  the  advantage  of  her 
discipline,  the  self-sacrificing  lives  of  many  of  her 
priests,  the  inspiring  beauty  of  her  worship,  the 
devotion  and  philanthropy  of  her  religious  orders. 
We  must  accord  to  her  high  praise  for  her  preserva- 
tion of  the  Holy  Eucharist  as  the  supreme  act  of 
worship.  No  less  will  we  thank  God  for  the  lives 
of  her  saints  and  the  spiritual  treasury  of  her  ascetic 
theology. 

To  aid  any  in  solving  the  problem  Rome  presents, 
let  us  first  state  the  claim  made  by  her  to  a  supreme 
headship  and  universal  jurisdiction,  and  then  ex- 
amine fairly  the  proofs  urged  in  their  behalf. 

The  Church,  it  is  asserted  by  accredited  Roman 
theologians,  has  two  separate  elements :  the  primacy 
and  priesthood.  "These  are  embodied  in  the  pontifi- 


264          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

cate  and  the  episcopate.  Christ  did  not  institute  the 
visible  Church  as  a  constitutional  government,  but 
as  a  monarchy.  In  a  monarchy  one  person  and 
one  alone  is  in  possession  of  supreme  power.  As 
universal  ruler,  the  pope  has  power  to  make  univer- 
sal law  to  bind  the  whole  Church.  It  is  not  in  the 
power  of  all  the  bishops  in  one  body  to  make  a 
universal  law.  To  the  pontiff  the  election  of  bishops 
belongs  by  divine  right.  It  is  inherent  in  the  divinely 
established  primacy.  He  alone  has  authority  to  insti- 
tute new  dioceses.  And  when  he  speaks  ex  cathedra 
he  is  infallible,  and  his  judgments  are  irreformable." 
We  have  condensed  the  above  from  an  authorized 
Roman  work  on  the  papacy.1 

Color  is  given  to  the  Roman  claim  by  the  marked 
prominence  assigned  to  S.  Peter  in  the  Gospels.  It 
would  be  contrary  to  Catholic  thought  if  we  saw 
nothing  of  spiritual  significance  in  this  fact.  But 
facts,  according  to  the  modern  scientific  method  of 
inquiry,  are  not  to  be  considered  apart,  but  in  regard 
to  their  growth,  evolution,  and  co-ordinate  relations. 
In  this  way  we  must  examine  the  pre-eminence  of 
S.  Peter,  and  compare  it  with  the  distinctions  given 
other  Apostles.  In  the  Gospels  we  recognize  the 
transparent  eminence  of  S.  Peter,  S.  James,  and  S. 
John.  In  the  Acts  and  Epistles,  the  two  most  dis- 
tinguished are  S.  Peter  and  S.  Paul.  In  the  Revela- 
tion we  have  S.  John. 

The  first  point  to  be  noticed  in  our  examination  is 
that  these  three  have  all  special  names  or  titles  of  honor 
given  them.  This  distinction  does  not  pertain,  as  is 

*  Humphrey,  S.  J.,  Urbs  et  Orbis. 


S.  PETER'S   PRE-EMINENCE  265 

often  overlooked,  to  S.  Peter  alone.  All  three  have 
their  special  designations  of  office  and  honor.  S. 
John  has  for  his  title  that  of  "  Son  of  Thunder."  His 
evangel  is  full  of  the  light  and  life  that  came  down 
from  heaven.  He  is  the  doctor  of  the  incarnation, 
of  the  Word  made  flesh.  He  is  pre-eminent  in  his 
intimacy  with  our  Lord,  and  is  called  "  the  beloved 
disciple."  Saul's  name  is  changed  to  Paul.  The 
change  is  significant  of  his  conversion  and  office. 
The  latter  is  denoted  by  a  change  from  a  Hebrew  to 
a  Roman  name,  marking  out  his  mission  as  the  great 
Apostle  to  the  Gentiles.  Our  Lord  gives  to  Simon 
an  added  name,  the  name  of  Cephas,  "  which  is  by 
interpretation  a  stone."  It  was  given  to  declare  both 
the  needed  transformation  of  his  nature  by  union 
with  Christ,  the  Living  Rock,  and  also  his  becoming 
the  first  Apostolic  foundation  stone  of  the  Christian 
Church.  To  him  also  Christ  gives  the  keys  of  the 
new  kingdom. 

What  are  the  ideas  we  naturally  associate  with 
these  names  and  titles?  To  Saul  a  changed  name  is 
given  declarative  of  his  conversion  and  mission  to 
the  Gentile  world.  S.  John's  name  is  not  changed, 
but  a  title  is  given  him :  "  Son  of  Thunder."  It 
lifts  our  minds  heavenward.  We  think  of  the  majes- 
tic roll  of  heaven's  artillery,  of  the  awe-compelling 
voice  from  above,  of  the  forked  lightning's  vivid 
flash.  We  see  how  fitting  this  is  to  the  great  Apostle 
and  evangelist  of  the  incarnation.  He  it  is  who  pro- 
claims as  no  other  the  awe-thrilling  utterance  of  the 
Word  made  flesh;  who  preserves  the  great  sacra- 
mental discourses;  of  the  bread  that  came  from 


266         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

heaven,  of  the  birth  from  above,  and  the  wind  blowing 
where  it  listeth ;  who  is  the  medium  of  communi- 
cation between  our  Lord  in  glory  and  His  Church, 
and  who  proclaims  that  final  coming  which  shall  be 
as  lightning  shining  from  the  East  to  the  West. 

To  Simon  an  added  name  was  given.  If  S.  John 
was,  as  S.  Augustine  thought,  a  type  of  the  new  dis- 
pensation and  S.  Peter  of  the  old,  we  see  how  appro- 
priate it  was  that  to  John,  the  loved  disciple,  a  title 
was  given  signifying  that  dispensation  which  was 
inaugurated  by  the  heavenly  message  to  the  Blessed 
Virgin,  and  welcomed  from  off  heaven's  rood  screen 
by  the  angelic  choir.  Equally,  how  fitting  it  was 
that  Simon  should  have  the  name  rock  or  stone 
added  to  his  former  one,  signifying  thereby  how  the 
new  temple  of  which  he  was  to  be  a  part  was  to  be 
builded  on  the  old  foundation. 

These  three  prominent  Apostles,  it  is  further  to  be 
noticed,  succeed  one  another,  and  pass  before  our 
vision  across  the  field  of  history  in  a  most  suggestive 
order.  S.  Peter  first  engages  our  attention.  He  is 
pre-eminent  in  the  preparatory  stage  when  our  Lord 
was  engaged  in  laying  the  foundations  of  His  king- 
dom. But  this  pre-eminence  does  not  continue.  The 
most  superficial  reader  of  the  New  Testament  can  but 
notice  the  marked  distinction  between  the  position 
given  S.  Peter  in  the  first  part  of  the  Acts  from  that 
he  subsequently  occupied.  When  our  Lord  was  lay- 
ing foundations,  as  recorded  in  the  Gospels,  then 
Peter,  who  was  the  special  type  of  that  old  order,  is 
pre-eminent  among  the  other  Apostles.  When  this 
work  is  done  a  change  takes  place.  S.  Peter  is  no 


S.   PETER'S   PRE-EMINENCE  267 

longer  recorded  as  first,  but  the  names  in  the  Apos- 
tolic roll-call  are  reversed,  and  it  is  "  James,  Peter, 
and  John."  Then,  as  the  figure  of  Peter  fades  away, 
our  spiritual  gaze  is  concentrated  on  S.  Paul.  He 
then  becomes  the  central  figure,  the  great  world-wide 
missionary,  the  specially  consecrated  Apostle,  by 
command  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  When  S.  Peter  and 
S.  Paul  and  all  the  other  Apostles  have  passed  from 
earth,  then  S.  John  becomes  the  most  prominent,  and 
his  prominence  is  most  significant  and  unique.  We 
behold  him,  the  only  surviving  Apostle,  certainly 
with  no  earthly  superior,  ruling  at  Ephesus  over  the 
Church;  establishing  the  Episcopal  order  throughout 
Asia;  completing  the  New  Testament  by  writing  the 
Fourth  Gospel,  his  general  Epistles  and  his  Book  of 
Revelation.  S.  Peter's  work  was  finished  and  so  was 
S.  Paul's.  Christ  after  the  ascension  instructs  His 
Church  through  neither  of  these  two,  but  through 
S.  John. 

As  we  thus  contrast  the  prominence  of  these 
Apostles  we  see  that  that  of  S.  Peter  was  connected 
with  the  foundation-laying  period  of  the  Church, 
S.  Paul  to  that  of  its  extension  to  the  Gentiles, 
S.  John  to  that  of  the  completion  of  the  Gospel 
revelation  and  its  settled  organization.  They  pass 
from  earth  and  no  one  succeeds  them  in  their  re- 
spective offices,  for  with  their  passing  their  personal 
offices  have  ceased. 

We  have  as  yet  only  contrasted  them  in  a  general 
way.  Let  us  now  analyze  the  life  of  S.  Paul  and  see 
what  things  are  said  of  him?  Are  they  of  like  sig- 
nificance to  those  recorded  of  S.  Peter?  If  so,  and  if 


268          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

they  do  not  imply  that  Paul  was  consequently  the 
source  of  all  jurisdiction  and  centre  of  unity,  then 
those  of  like  character  concerning  Peter  do  not  imply 
what  Rome  now  claims,  namely,  superiority  of  office 
over  the  other  Apostles. 

The  calling  of  the  two  Apostles  was  different. 
Peter,  a  type  of  the  old  dispensation,  was  brought  by 
his  converted  younger  brother  Andrew  to  Christ. 
To  Saul  our  Lord  miraculously  appeared  and  com- 
missioned him.  He  was  to  go  to  the  Gentiles  "  unto 
whom  I  now  send  thee.  And  not  to  the  Gentiles 
only,  for  he  is  a  chosen  vessel  unto  me,  to  bear  my 
name  before  the  Gentiles  and  the  children  of  Israel." 
Peter  opens  the  kingdom  to  Jew  and  Gentile.  Paul  is 
to  extend  it  "  among  all  nations"  Paul's  calling, 
mission,  consecration,  v were  entirely  independent  of 
S.  Peter,  and  his  jurisdiction  was  regulated  by  the 
Apostles. 

Take  another  point.  Consider  the  establishment 
of  the  Christian  ministry.  How  much  had  S.  Peter 
to  do  with  it,  and  how  much  S.  Paul?  This  will 
surely  give  us  a  critical  test  as  to  their  respective 
pre-eminence  in  the  Christian  Church.  Much  is  made 
by  Romans  of  S.  Peter's  publication  of  the  vacancy 
in  the  twelve  foundations  and  the  necessity  of  filling 
Judas's  place.  But  he  does  not  fill  the  vacancy  by 
his  own  appointment  as  he  would  have  done,  were  he, 
as  the  pope  claims  to  be,  the  vicar  of  Christ.  The 
duty  he  performed  belonged  to  him  as  holding  the 
leadership  among  the  Twelve.  It  was  for  him  to 
point  out  the  vacancy,  and  this  is  all  he  is  said  to 
have  done.  He  did  not  even  direct  how  the  vacancy 


S.   PETER'S   PRE-EMINENCE  269 

was  to  be  filled.  It  was  done  by  the  action  of  the 
whole  assembled  Church. 

When  we  come  to  the  establishment  and  ordination 
of  the  Christian  ministry  it  is  significant  that  S.  Peter 
has  nothing  specially  to  do  with  it.  How  conclu- 
sively this  tells  against  the  Roman  theory  is  shown  by 
their  unwarranted  assertions.  In  a  Roman  life  of  S. 
Peter  which  was  put  forth  with  the  imprimatur  of 
several  cardinals,  it  is  stated  1  "  that  sometime  after 
this  (Pentecost)  S.  Peter  consecrated  S.  James  Bishop 
of  Jerusalem  !  "  The  Abbe  Fouard  in  his  book  on  S. 
Peter2  says  "  that  the  hierarchy  was  founded,  deacons 
ordained,  the  priesthood  established,  in  fine,  the 
Church  has  detached  herself  from  the  synagogue, 
and  thus  the  ground  plan  of  the  work  appears  finished 
before  ever  Paul  begins  his  labors !  Indeed,  far  from 
being  an  organizer,  Saul  of  Tarsus  is  at  this  date  a 
simple  layman  !  " 

Far  different,  however,  is  the  record  in  the  Word  of 
God.  When  the  first  order  of  the  Christian  ministry 
begins  to  be  formed,3  S.  Peter,  save  as  being  included 
in  the  Twelve,  is  not  even  mentioned.  It  is  the  Twelve 
who  bid  the  multitude  look  out  and  select  the  seven 
candidates,  whom  they  set  before  the  Apostles  and  on 
whom  the  Apostles  lay  their  hands.  S.  Peter  is  never 
said  by  himself  to  have  ordered  the  ordination  or 
ordained  any  one,  either  to  the  diaconate  or  priest- 
hood or  episcopate.  But  we  do  read  that  S.  Paul 
ordained  "  elders  in  every  city,"  4  and  of  his  gathering 

1  Deliquey,  S.  J.,  Life  of  S.  Peter,  p.  7. 

2  S.  Peter,  Constant  Fouard,  p.  9. 

8  Acts  vi.  2.  *  Acts  xiv.  23. 


2;o         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

by  laying  on  of  hands1  Timothy  and  Titus  into  the 
higher  order  of  the  episcopate.  Moreover,  in  regard 
to  holy  orders,  it  is  not  S.  Peter  but  S.  Paul2  who 
formulates  the  canon  for  the  Church's  guidance  re- 
garding the  admission  of  persons,  their  qualifications, 
and  their  subsequent  discipline.  The  fact  that  S. 
Peter  had  of  record  nothing  to  do  with  the  ordaining 
of  the  Christian  ministry  is  another  proof  that  his 
pre-eminence  has  relation  to  the  foundation-laying 
period  of  the  Church,  and  not  to  its  subsequent 
developed  state. 

Let  us  now  consider  the  discipline  of  the  Church. 
Which  of  the  two,  S.  Peter  or  S.  Paul,  has  the  pre- 
eminence? Does  the  record  show  that  S.  Peter  was 
in  this  the  superior  of  S.  Paul? 

There  are  two  cases  of  discipline  determined  by  S. 
Peter ;  one  in  Samaria  on  the  Gentile  Simon  Magus,3 
and  one  in  Solomon's  porch,  the  remaining  part  of 
the  old  temple,  upon  the  Jews  Ananias  and  Sapphira. 
To  S.  Peter  had  been  given  the  keys  of  the  new  king- 
dom to  open  and  shut,  to  bind  or  loose,  and  we  find 
him  exercising  this  power  both  on  Jew  and  Gentile. 
We  find  in  like  manner  S.  Paul  smiting  the  false 
prophet  Bar-Jesus,  a  Jew,  and  later  pronouncing 
judgment  on  the  guilty  Gentile  Corinthian.  But 
note  the  difference  in  the  sentence.  S.  Paul  exer- 
cises the  more  ghostly  discipline  of  the  Church.  He 
casts  the  guilty  Corinthian  out  of  the  Church  of  God,4 
and  delivers  him  over  to  Satan,  and  subsequently 
inflicts  the  same  penalty  of  excommunication  on 

1  2  Tim.  i.  6.  *  Acts  viii.  20. 

2  I  Tim.  iii.  *  i  Cor.  v.  5. 


S.   PETER'S   PRE-EMINENCE  271 

Hymenaeus  and  Alexander.  S.  Peter  never  excom- 
municated any  one.  S.  Paul  did.  This  is  a  far 
greater  exercise  of  sovereignty  than  that  of  Peter's 
infliction  of  a  death  penalty.  The  latter  any  earthly 
monarch  might  inflict,  only  the  representative  of  the 
awful  majesty  of  God  could  inflict  the  former. 

In  the  general  discipline  of  the  Church  we  see 
that  it  was'S.  Paul  who  gave  the  canons  for  the 
admission  of  persons  to  holy  orders,  condemned  the 
Corinthian  Church1  for  sacrilegious  administration 
of  the  Holy  Eucharist,  gave  the  general  rules  con- 
cerning the  conduct  of  divine  service;2  and  the 
ancient  liturgies,  it  has  been  observed,3  follow  the 
order  he  records.  While  both  he  and  S.  Peter 
alike  exhort  the  clergy  and  laity,  S.  Paul  decides  the 
great  problems  relating  to  the  Church's  discipline 
and  conduct,  the  marriage  relation,  the  duties  of 
master  and  slaves,  the  use  of  the  gifts  of  tongues  in 
church,  the  eating  of  things  offered  to  idols.  Upon 
him  comes,  he  exclaims,  "  the  care  of  all  the 
churches."  If  this  had  been  said  of  Peter  how  would 
not  that  text  have  been  reiteratedly  pressed  by  Romans 
to  prove  his  supremacy.  How  blind,  it  would  have 
been  said,  are  those  Easterns  and  Anglicans  who  do 
not  see  it. 

We  cannot  close  the  point  of  church  discipline 
without  mentioning  that  in  the  administration  of  his 
office,  Paul  "withstood  Peter  to  the  face,  because  he 
was  to  be  blamed."4  Not  because  they  differed  on 
some  subordinate  matter  of  policy,  as  Romans  are 

1  I  Cor.  xi.  3  See  Liddon's  notes  on  I  Timothy  ii  i. 

2  i  Tim.  ii.  I.  *  Gal.  ii.  u. 


272         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

wont  to  say,  but  because,  as  it  is  written,  Peter 
"  walked  not  uprightly  according  to  the  truth  of  the 
gospel."  It  was  a  severe  arraignment.  S.  Paul 
evidently  did  not  regard  S.  Peter  as  an  infallible  guide 
either  in  faith  or  in  morals.  How  destructive  this 
incident  is  felt  to  be  even  by  Romans  themselves  to 
their  theory  is  seen  by  the  efforts  made  by  them 
to  avoid  its  force.  In  the  Roman  book  we  have  be- 
fore referred  to,  page  I,  it  is  said  :  "  That  the  Cephas 
who  was  reproached  by  S.  Paul  for  the  inconsistency 
of  his  conduct  with  respect  to  the  Mosaic  rites  was 
not  S.  Peter,  is  the  opinion  of  the  best  writers ! " 
Roman  cardinals  and  archbishops  and  bishops  gave 
their  imprimatur  to  this  work. 

Another  way  of  contrasting  these  two  Apostles  is 
to  examine  their  visions.  Each  was  wonderfully 
favored  by  God.  But  their  visions  differ  in  number, 
subjects,  and  purpose.  When  S.  Peter  was  at  Joppa l 
he  fell  into  a  trance  and  saw  heaven  open  and  a  great 
sheet  let  down  wherein  were  all  manner  of  four-footed 
beasts,  etc.,  and  there  came  a  voice  to  him:  "  Rise, 
Peter,  kill  and  eat."  By  this  vision  he  was  prepared 
to  go  to  the  Gentile  Cornelius2  and  receive  him  into 
the  Church.  At  Pentecost  he  had  gathered  the  Jews, 
and  now  he  was  to  bring  in  the  Gentiles.  This  was 
his  special  work  as  foundation  layer  and  opener  of 
the  kingdom.  On  the  other  hand,  there  are  six 
visions  vouchsafed  to  S.  Paul.  In  four  our  Lord 
Himself  appears  to  him.  Saul  was  informed  in  a 
vision  3  that  Ananias  would  come  and  cure  his  blind- 
ness. At  Troas4  a  vision  appeared  to  Paul  in  the 

1  Acts  x.          2  Acts  x.  47.          8  Acts  ix.  1 2.          *  Acts  xvi.  9. 


S.   PETER'S   PRE-EMINENCE  273 

night,  and  there  stood  a  man  of  Macedonia  who  said, 
"  Come  over  and  help  us."  At  some  place  not  given, 
our  Lord  revealed  to  Paul  the  institution  of  the  Holy 
Communion,  His  one  great  act  of  worship,  and  that 
it  was  a  "shewing  forth  of  His  death  till  He  come."1 
At  Jerusalem,  in  the  temple,2  in  a  trance,  the  Lord 
said  unto  him :  "  Make  haste,  depart,  for  I  will  send 
thee  far  hence  unto  the  Gentiles."  At  Corinth3  the 
Lord  spake  unto  Paul  in  the  night  by  a  vision :  "  Be 
not  afraid ;  but  speak,  and  hold  not  thy  peace,  for  I 
am  with  thee,  and  no  man  shall  set  on  thee  to  hurt 
thee."  Again  we  read,4  at  night  the  Lord  stood  by 
him  and  said :  "  Be  of  good  cheer,  Paul :  for  as  thou 
hast  testified  of  me  in  Jerusalem,  so  must  thou  bear 
witness  at  Rome."  No  command,  it  may  be  noticed, 
is  ever  given  to  Peter  to  bear  witness  at  Rome.  But 
why  not,  if  our  being  in  the  true  Church  depends  on 
it?  At  sea5  S.  Paul  writes  :  "  There  stood  by  me  this 
night  the  angel  of  the  Lord  whose  I  am  and  whom  I 
serve,  saying,  Fear  not,  Paul,  and  lo,  God  hath  given 
thee  all  them  that  sail  with  thee!"  What  if  these 
words  had  been  said  of  S.  Peter !  Would  they  not  have 
been  placed  in  the  forefront  of  every  Roman  argu- 
ment? Would  they  not  have  found  place  around  S. 
Peter's  dome?  But  it  is  not  said  of  those  who  are  in 
Peter's  boat,  but  in  Paul's.  "The  Lord  hath  given 
thee  all  them  that  sail  with  thee."  Contrast  thus  the 
visions.  They  show  Paul  to  be  the  special  leader  in 
extending  the  new  dispensation,  as  Peter  was  the 

1  i  Cor.  xi.  26.  4  Acts  xxiii.  n. 

2  Acts  xxii.  18-21.  6  Acts  xxvii.  23,  24. 
8  Acts  xviii.  9. 

18 


274         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

foundation  layer  and  door  opener  of  it.  In  confirma- 
tion of  this  pre-eminence  in  the  way  of  visions,  it  is 
never  said  of  S.  Peter  as  it  was  of  S.  Paul,  he  was 
"  caught  up  into  the  third  heaven." 

Take  another  department.  Consider  their  miracles. 
These  also  are  not  without  their  import.  Through 
each  of  these  great  servants  the  Lord  shows  forth 
His  power.  He  works  through  them.  They  stretch 
forth  "  thine  hand  to  heal."  We  find  S.  Peter  healing 
Eneas,  sick  of  the  palsy  at  Lydda,1  and  saying, 
"  Jesus  Christ  maketh  thee  whole."  He  also  raises 
Dorcas,2  saying,  "  Tabitha,  arise."  At  the  temple 
gate 3  Peter  took  the  impotent  man  "  by  the  right 
hand  and  lifted  him  up."  We  read4  that  they 
"  brought  forth  the  sick  into  the  streets  that  at  least 
the  shadow  of  Peter  passing  by  might  overshadow 
some  of  them,"  "  and  they  were  healed  every  one." 
We  read  in  like  manner  of  S.  Paul  5  that  at  Lystra 
he  healed  the  impotent  man,  saying,  "  Stand  upright 
on  thy  feet ;  and  he  leaped  and  walked."  At  Troas, 
at  the  Eucharist 6  he  recalls  life  to  Eutychus,  "  who 
was  taken  up  dead."  At  Thyatira 7  he  cast  out  a 
devil  from  the  possessed  damsel,  saying,  "  I  command 
thee  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  to  come  out  of  her." 
"  God,"  we  also  read,8  "  wrought  special  miracles 
by  the  hands  of  Paul :  so  that  from  his  body  were 
brought  unto  the  sick  handkerchiefs  or  aprons, 
and  the  diseases  departed  from  them."  But,  and 
here  we  shall  find  the  most  significant  contrasts, 

1  Acts  ix.  34.  4  Acts  v.  15,  16.  T  Acts  xvi.  18. 

2  Acts  ix.  40.  B  Acts  xiv.  10.  8  Acts  xix.  12. 
8  Acts  iii.                         6  Acts  xx.  9. 


S.   PETER'S   PRE-EMINENCE  275 

consider  their  marvellous  deliverances.  S.  Paul's  are 
most  notable  and  symbolical  of  the  Christian  dispen- 
sation. He  shakes  off  the  viper  from  his  hand  with- 
out harm,  when  the  bystanders  expect  to  see  him 
fall  down  dead.  At  Lystra  he  is  stoned,  and  they, 
supposing  him  to  be  dead,1  carried  his  body  out  of 
the  city,  when,  as  a  type  of  the  risen  Christ,  "  he  rose 
up  and  came  into  the  city."  Nothing  so  wonderful 
is  recorded  of  S.  Peter. 

In  addition,  there  is  Paul's  deliverance  from  prison 
and  death,  and  this  should  be  most  carefully  ex- 
amined in  contrast  with  that  of  Peter.  All  the 
Apostles  were  once  delivered  from  prison,2  and  the 
angel  of  the  Lord  by  night  opened  the  prison  doors 
and  brought  them  forth.  But  the  two  Apostles  are 
especially  delivered,  and  these  deliverances  are  full  of 
suggestive  contrasts.  S.  Peter's  is  a  type  of  the 
deliverance  of  the  Jewish  Church ;  S.  Paul's,  of  the 
inherent,  indestructible  life  of  the  Christian.  To 
Peter,  as  to  the  Jewish  Church,  comes  an  angel  with 
his  heavenly  message.  A  light  shines  in  the  prison. 
But  the  angel  has  to  smite  Peter,  sunk  in  lethargy 
like  Judaism,  to  rouse  him.  He  must  arise  and 
clothe  and  gird  himself,  as  Israel  had  to  do  by 
penitence,  and  follow  his  heaven-sent  guide.  And 
then,  when  past  the  iron  gate  of  the  law,  he  must 
find  his  way  to  the  house,  symbolical  of  the  Christian 
Church,  where  prayer  has  been  made  for  him. 

Paul  and  Silas  are  likewise  carefully  secured  and 
are  placed  in  the  inner  prison,  their  feet  being  made 
fast  in  the  stocks.  At  midnight  they  pray  and  sing 

1  Acts  xiv.  19,  20.  a  Acts  v.  19. 


276          CHRISTIAN   AND    CATHOLIC 

praises  to  God.  Suddenly  there  was  a  great  earth- 
quake, "  and  all  the  doors  were  opened  and  every 
one's  bands  were  loosed."  No  angel  comes  with  a 
message  from  heaven,  for  they  are  possessed  of  the 
new  revelation.  Peter,  like  the  Jewish  Church,  sleeps, 
and  can  only  be  roused  by  the  sharp  discipline  of  the 
angel's  blow.  He  owes  his  release  to  the  prayers  of 
the  Church  without.  But  Paul  and  Silas,  typical  of 
the  Christian  state,  are  awake  and  are  praising  God. 
Even  as  Christ  rose  by  His  own  inherent  life-power, 
they  owe  their  deliverance  to  no  external  aid.  It 
is  their  own  prayers  and  praises  that  bring  on  the 
miraculous  earthquake.  Only  from  the  hands  of 
the  aroused  Peter  do  the  chains  fall  off;  but  in 
the  other  case  the  gracious  power  of  the  Gospel 
is  seen,  for  "all  the  doors  were  opened  and  every 
one's  bands  were  loosed."  In  Peter's  case  we  have 
the  sad  ending  of  the  judicial  killing  of  the  innocent 
keepers.  They  may  be  a  type  of  the  unconverted 
Jew  or  Gentile  who  perish.  Paul's  safety  ends  in  no 
such  tragedy,  but  with  the  deliverance  of  his  keeper 
both  from  temporal  and  spiritual  death.  We  are 
assured  of  the  keeper's  newly  found  faith,  his  marvel- 
lous conversion  and  his  baptism.  This  great  de- 
liverance, moreover,  ends  with  Christian  feasting  and 
rejoicing,  and  Paul's  triumph  over  the  magistrates 
themselves.  It  sets  forth  the  triumph  of  the  Christian 
Church. 

Consider,  again,  the  preaching  of  the  Apostles.  We 
should  not  have  thought  it  needful  to  contrast  the 
preaching  and  witness-bearing  of  the  Apostles,  but 
the  fact  of  "  Peter's  standing  up  with  the  Eleven,"  and 


S.  PETER'S  PRE-EMINENCE  277 

"in  their  midst,"  has  been  cited  in  proof  of  his 
prominence.  The  question  is,  what  does  that  promi- 
nence signify?  We  have  claimed  for  him  a  special 
place  of  distinction  and  honor  in  the  Apostolic 
college.  He  is  first  of  the  Twelve.  He  has  the 
keys.  He  opens  the  kingdom  by  his  sermons  at 
Pentecost l  to  the  Jews,  and  at  Caesarea 2  to  the 
Gentiles.  He  explains  his  reception  of  Cornelius3 
to  the  Apostles.  These  are  his  principal  sermons. 
At  the  council 4  it  is  unwarrantable  to  say  "  that  he 
presides."  It  is  only  fair  to  say  that  of  the  Apostles 
he  speaks  first  and  gives  his  opinion.  The  same 
view  is  maintained  by  Barnabas  and  Paul.  Then 
James  gives  his  own  judgment.  Peter  is  not  the 
central  figure,  as  Romans  claim,  and  no  more  promi- 
nent than  the  others.  Neither  would  we  assert,  as 
some  have,  that  S.  James,  as  the  presiding  prelate, 
decided  the  case.  What  settles  the  matter  against 
Peter's  pre-eminence  is  that  the  decree  runs  not  in 
the  name  of  Peter,  but  in  that  of  "  the  Apostles  and 
elders  and  brethren." 

In  connection  with  this  it  is  not  necessary  to  re- 
count S.  Paul's  many  sermons,  his  defence  of  the 
faith  before  kings,  or  his  writing  more  than  half  the 
New  Testament.  His  place  as  the  great  Apostolic 
teacher  is  unique.  In  contrast  with  Peter,  no  words 
of  authority  like  Paul's  are  to  be  found  in  S.  Peter's 
epistles.  "  Lo,"  says  S.  Paul,  "  I  have  not  shunned 
to  declare  unto  you  all  the  counsel  of  God."  6  "  If  an 

1  Acts  iii.  *  Acts  xv. 

*  Acts  x.  6  Acts  xx.  27. 

8  Acts  xi. 


278          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

angel  from  heaven  or  any  man  preach  any  other 
gospel  unto  you  than  that  we  have  preached  unto 
you,  let  him  be  accursed."1  "Be  ye  followers  of 
me,  as  dear  children."  "  If  our  gospel  be  hid, 
it  is  hid  to  them  that  are  lost."  2  What  words  also 
of  cheer  he  utters  (the  very  words  of  Christ)  :  "  There 
shall  not  a  hair  fall  from  the  head  of  any  one  of 
you." 

As  in  their  mutual  relationship  there  is  seen  to  be 
no  superiority  of  authority  of  one  over  the  other,  so 
in  relation  to  the  Apostolic  college  both  are  alike 
subordinate  to  it.  While,  as  Trent  says,  "the  hierarchy 
consists  of  the  three  sacred  orders,"  the  officers  of  the 
Christian  Church,  as  given  in  Corinthians  and  Ephe- 
sians,  are  not,  first  Peter,  but  "  first  Apostles."  S. 
Peter  only  claims  3  to  be  "  an  Apostle,"  one  like,  not 
one  over  the  others.  His  glorious  foundation-laying 
office  over,  his  name  no  longer  stands  first  in  the  list, 
which  now  reads  "  James  and  Cephas  and  John." 4 
He  does  not  exercise  any  jurisdictional  authority  over 
the  other  Apostles,  but  is  sent  by  them  into  Samaria.6 
He  does  not  assume  for  himself  jurisdiction,  but,  as 
to  Paul  the  care  of  the  Gentiles  is  assigned,  so  to 
Peter  is  committed  by  the  Apostles  that  of  the  cir- 
cumcision.6 The  three  keys  Peter  holds  in  his  hands, 
says  a  Roman  writer,  shows  "  that  authority  in  heaven, 
in  hell,  and  on  earth  is  granted  to  him."  This  is  the 
assigned  meaning  to  the  pope's  triple  tiara.  Any- 
thing, we  submit,  more  unlike  the  scriptural  position 
given  Peter,  it  is  difficult  to  imagine. 

1  Gal.  i.  8.  8  i  Peter  i.  6  Acts  viii.  14. 

2  2  Cor.  iv.  3.  4  Gal.  ii.  9.  •  Gal.  ii.  7. 


S.  PETER'S   PRE-EMINENCE          279 

Nor  is  the  manner  in  which  these  Apostles  pass 
from  the  scriptural  record  without  its  significance. 
The  last  recorded  appearance  of  S.  Peter  in  Acts  is 
at  the  Council.  He  has  laid  the  foundation  and 
opened  the  kingdom  to  Jew  and  Gentile,  and  now 
his  work  of  leadership  is  done.  It  was  not  an  office 
he  could  transmit  to  a  successor.  No  one  could  ever 
take  his  place.  Like  a  foundation,  he  becomes  in 
Holy  Scripture  hidden  and  out  of  sight.  But  all 
along  there  is  noticeable  a  growing  prominence  of 
S.  Paul,  and  a  resemblance,  as  a  typical  representative, 
to  Christ.  Like  Him,  he  suffered  in  the  wilderness. 
Like  Christ,  he  was  in  watchings  often,  in  hunger  and 
thirst,  in  fastings  often,  in  cold  and  nakedness.  Like 
Him,  he  is  accused  of  speaking  against  the  law  of  the 
Jews,  the  temple,  and  Cassar.  Like  Him,  the  Jews 
conspire  to  kill  him.  As  Pilate  declared  of  Christ, 
"  I  have  found  no  cause  of  death  in  Him,"  so  Festus 
said  of  Paul.  Like  Him,  he  was  stoned.  Like  Him, 
smitten  when  answering  the  High  Priest.  Like  Him, 
he  was  scourged.  Like  Him,  he  was  deserted  and 
forsaken.  He  could  say,  "  I  bear  in  my  body  the 
marks  of  the  Lord  Jesus."  Like  Christ,  he  is  in  the 
storm.  In  spite  of  shipwreck,  all  who  sail  with  him 
are  saved.  The  enduring  nature  of  the  Gospel  is 
seen  in  the  last  picture  of  him  securely  dwelling  in 
Rome  in  his  own  house,  "  Preaching  the  kingdom  o{ 
God  and  teaching  those  things  which  concern  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ."  The  Word  of  God  was  rightly 
interpreted  by  S.  Ambrose  when  he  said,  "  Nee  Paulus 
inferior  Petro." 


280          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

May  God  open  the  eyes  at  least  of  all  Anglicans 
to  a  right  understanding  of  His  Word,  and  deliver 
them  from  any  delusion  about  Peter's  pre-eminence  as 
significant  of  any  office  which  made  him  the  superior 
of  the  other  Apostles,  and  which  was  to  be  transmitted 
to  a  successor. 


CHAPTER    XV 

S.  PETER  AND  S.  JOHN 

THE  position  of  leadership  held  by  Peter  among 
the  Twelve  was  one  of  distinguished  honor  and 
responsibility.  With  some  of  the  fathers,  we  may  call 
him  prince  of  the  Apostles,  meaning  thereby  what 
Holy  Scripture  does  when  it  records  him  as  "  first." 
It  gave  him  no  office  of  authority  over  the  others, 
any  more  than  when  we  say  of  some  distinguished 
lawyer  that  he  is  the  head  or  leader  of  the  bar.  He 
was,  on  many  occasions,  the  spokesman  of  the  Twelve. 
His  special  work,  of  confessor  of  Christ  on  the  part 
of  Israel,  and  his  office  as  foundation  layer,  was  not 
such  as  to  allow  of  a  successor.  He  was  in  every 
way  a  typical  representative  of  the  old  dispensation. 
The  idea  is  an  ancient  one.  In  the  catacombs  there 
has  been  found  a  symbolical  device  of  Peter  striking 
the  rock.  Peter  is  not  thereby  represented  to  us  as 
another  Moses,  as  Romans  have  claimed,  but  only 
like  unto  Moses  in  striking  the  rock.  Peter  is  thus 
witnessed  by  the  tradition  of  those  early  days  not  as 
the  rock;  but  the  rock  out  from  whom  the  living 
waters  flow  is  Christ. 

We  have  seen  in  contrasting  the  recorded  lives  of 
S.  Peter  and  S.  Paul  how  that  the  latter  was  the  typi- 
cal representative  of  the  spirit  of  the  new  and  the 
former  of  the  old  Israelitish  economy.  One,  the  first 


282         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

opener  with  the  keys  of  the  new,  whose  power  was 
subsequently  given  to  all ;  l  the  other,  the  efficient 
agent  in  its  extension.  In  order  that  our  examination 
of  the  spiritual  significance  of  the  prominence  of  Peter 
should  be  complete  we  must  now  contrast  it  with  that 
of  S.  John.  If  we  find  that  the  same  interpretation 
is  applicable  to  both  cases,  we  shall  have  conclu- 
sive proof  that  it  is  the  correct  one.  In  discover- 
ing it  we  shall  have  found  the  exegetical  key  which 
fits  and  turns  all  the  wards  of  the  lock. 

Let  us  then  contrast  the  lives  and  sayings  of  the 
two  Apostles,  what  they  did  and  what  they  said,  what 
they  said  to  our  Lord,  and  what  He  said  to  them. 
If  we  would  be  careful  as  well  as  reverent,  remember- 
ing how  pregnant  with  meaning  Holy  Scripture  is, 
we  must  not  neglect  particulars  however  small.  For 
it  is  often  in  seemingly  insignificant  details  that  the 
spiritual  mind  discerns  the  hidden  treasure  of  divine 
wisdom.  If  we  would  discover  it  and  make  it  our 
own,  we  must  also  seek  for  it  with  humble  minds  and 
prayer. 

It  is  interesting  to  observe  how  S.  Peter  first  came 
to  Christ.  S.  Andrew  brought  him.  It  is  the  familiar 
type  so  often  seen  in  the  Old  Testament,  of  the 
younger  taking  precedence  of  the  elder.  Peter  is 
thus  sought  out,  as  God  sought  out  his  ancient 
people,  and  is  by  his  younger  brother  brought  to 
Christ. 

Again,  S.  Peter  and  S.  John  stand  together  as  the 
older  and  younger  man;  and  the  contrast  of  age 
begins  to  tell  us  of  which  dispensation  each  is  the 

1  S.  Matt,  xviii.  18. 


S.   PETER  AND   S.  JOHN  283 

type.  Their  condition  in  life  yet  further  portrays, 
and  with  more  distinctness,  the  same  idea.  S.  Peter 
is  the  married  man,  S.  John  the  virgin  disciple. 
The  one  thereby  a  type  of  that  older  Church,  so 
often  spoken  of  by  the  prophets  as  betrothed  to 
God;  the  other  a  symbol  of  the  Bride,  yet  in  its 
virgin  state  and  beauty,  that  was  to  be. 

We  know  but  little  of  their  previous  history,  save 
that  both  were  fishermen ;  but  of  their  respective 
homes,  two  references  are  recorded.  In  the  begin- 
ning of  our  Lord's  ministry  He  goes  to  Peter's  house. 
And  we  may  not  wisely  overlook  the  fact  that  it  is  at 
the  beginning  of  it.  He  finds  there  quite  a  type  of 
the  state  of  the  Jewish  Church,  Peter's  wife's  mother 
sick  of  fever.  And  He  came  and  took  her  by  the 
hand  and  lifted  her  up  and  the  fever  left  her  and  she 
arose  and  ministered  to  them.  So  at  last,  raised  up 
and  restored,  comes  converted  Israel  to  the  Master's 
aid.  S.  Peter's  house  is  a  type  of  the  Jewish  Church. 
On  the  other  hand,  consider  the  house  of  S.  John. 
On  the  cross  Christ  says  to  S.  John,  "  Behold  thy 
mother."  And  from  that  hour  he  took  her,  who 
is  the  special  type  of  the  Christian  Church,  "  to  his 
own  home."  The  house  of  S.  John  is  thus  symboli- 
cal of  the  Church  of  Christ. 

No  less  declarative  of  the  typical  place  these  two 
Apostles  occupy  in  the  Gospels  is  the  different  man- 
ner in  which  they  are  called  to  discipleship.  S.  Peter 
when  called  was  in  his  own  boat,  while  S.  John,  not 
yet  arrived  at  independent  ownership,  was  yet  in  the 
boat  of  his  father.  Peter,  like  the  older  organization 
he  represented,  was  diligently  engaged  in  his  occupa- 


284         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

tion,  "  casting  a  net  into  the  sea."  John  was  not  so 
engaged.  He  was  not  fishing,  but  only  preparing  to 
do  so.  John  and  his  brother  "were  mending  their 
nets."  When  Peter  is  called  he  leaves  his  fishing- 
nets.  John  leaves  his  father  and  the  ship  and  the 
hired  servant  and  goes  after  him. 

New  names  and  titles  are  given  to  each.  Simon  has 
that  of  Cephas.  It  was  emblematic  of  his  destined 
transformation  by  becoming,  through  incorporation 
into  the  Living  Rock,  christianized  and  made  a  new 
creature,  a  rock-man.  He  is  also  called  the  "First," 
and  in  this  office  of  leadership  he  is  the  spokesman 
and  confessor  of  Christ's  Messiahship  and  Divinity. 
He  is  also  the  foundation  layer  on  the  Rock,  which 
is  Christ,  of  the  new  temple,  of  which,  having  the 
keys,  he  is  the  first  opener  to  Jew  and  Gentile.  To 
S.  John  also  a  special  name  is  given.  S.  John  is 
named  Boanerges,  "  Son  of  Thunder."  It  tells  of  the 
light  and  life  from  heaven.  He  is  therefore  the 
special  evangelist  of  the  incarnation.  His  title  is 
that  of  "  the  loved  disciple."  This  title  by  itself 
declares  for  which  dispensation  he  stands.  With  a 
special  love  which  is  again  and  again  emphasized 
Christ  loved  S.  John.  He  lay,  as  it  was  granted  to 
no  other,  on  Jesus'  breast.  So  Christ  loved  His 
Church  and  gave  Himself  for  it.  Everything  about 
S.  John  declares  him  to  be  the  type  and  represen- 
tative of  the  Christian  Church. 

We  now  easily  understand  the  meaning  upon  which 
Romans  have  laid  stress,  that  Christ  preached  out  of 
Peter's  boat.  The  facts  are  these:  there  were  two 
empty  boats,  one  of  them,  Simon's,  in  charge  of 


S.  PETER  AND   S.  JOHN  285 

James  and  John,  who  were  partners  with  Simon. 
Our  Lord  selects  Simon's  as  His  pulpit  from  which 
to  address  the  multitude.  The  same  reason  incites 
Him  to  do  this  that  made  Him  choose  Solomon's 
porch  for  His  audience-chamber.  This  porch  was 
the  only  remaining  part  of  the  ancient  temple  which, 
at  its  dedication,  "the  glory  of  the  Lord  had  filled." 
Our  Lord's  life,  unlike  that  of  every  other  religious 
teacher,  had  been  foretold.  As  the  foretold  Messiah, 
Christ  came  in  the  fulfilment  of  the  law.  The  law 
bore  witness  to  Him.  He  unfolded  the  true  meaning 
of  its  prophecies  and  worship.  Every  ceremonial 
detail  of  its  sacrifices,  every  Messianic  utterance  of 
its  psalms,  found  their  fulfilment  in  Him.  So,  not 
in  any  honor  of  Peter,  but  because  his  boat  symbol- 
ized that  which  He  came  to  fulfil,  He  preaches  out  of 
Peter's  boat. 

The  same  symbolical  meaning  is  to  be  found  in 
the  other  incidents  of  the  story.  We  find,  in  con- 
formity to  the  type,  that  it  is  Peter's  net  that  breaks. 
The  fish  once  enclosed  now  rush  back  into  the  sea. 
It  is  the  remnant,  not  all  Israel,  that  is  saved.  Then 
in  his  distress  Peter  must  call  upon  his  partners  in 
the  other  boat,  that  they  come  and  help  him.  The 
old  order  thus  calls  for  help  unto  the  new  to  secure 
and  complete  its  work.  John  does  not  call  out  to 
Peter,  but  Peter,  beckoning  entreatingly,  summons 
John  to  his  aid. 1  If,  it  is  to  be  observed,  Christ  thus 
signifies  Peter's  symbolic  prominence  by  preaching 
out  of  his  boat,  the  favor  He  subsequently  grants  to 
John  is  of  far  more  emphatic  character.  S.  John,  as 
a  type  of  the  Christian  Church,  is  taken  up  into 

1  See  note  on  page  293. 


286          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

heaven.  To  him  are  revealed  the  deep  and  hidden 
things  of  the  kingdom,  the  glories  of  heaven,  the 
mysteries  of  the  underworld,  the  progressive  battle 
between  the  Church  and  her  foes. 

Equally  declarative  of  their  respective  positions 
are  the  questions  and  sayings  they  separately  address 
to  Christ.  The  inquiries  of  Peter  for  the  most  part 
are  relative  to  Israel's  search  for  the  promised  Mes- 
siah. Those  of  John  relate  to  the  rights  and  powers 
of  the  new  kingdom.  Thus  S.  Peter  says  to  Christ : 
"  Declare  unto  us  this  parable  !  "  "  Speakest  Thou 
this  to  us  or  unto  all  ?  "  "  Lord,  to  whom  shall  we  go  ?  " 
S.  John,  filled  with  holy  indignation  at  the  Samaritans' 
reflection  of  Christ,  asks :  "  Lord,  wilt  Thou  that  we 
command  fire  to  come  down  from  heaven  and  con- 
sume?" However  misapplied,  the  Son  of  Thunder 
is  filled  with  a  sense  of  the  awful  powers  which  the 
Christian  Church  possesses. 

When  Jesus  said,  "Who  touched  Me?"  S.  Peter 
must,  in  Jewish-like  undiscernment  say,  "  Master,  the 
multitude  presses  on  Thee  and  sayest  Thou,  '  Who 
touched  me  ? ' '  How  unlike  S.  John,  who  requires 
no  angel  to  tell  him  as  he  enters  the  empty  tomb  that 
Christ  is  risen,  but  at  once,  as  Peter  did  not,  "  sees 
and  believes."  Peter,  like  Israel,  seeks  a  sign.  "  Lord, 
if  it  be  Thou,  bid  me  come  to  Thee  on  the  water." 
John  needs  no  sign.  He  never  asks  for  one.  But 
when  Jesus  stood  on  the  shore  and  the  disciples  in 
the  boat  knew  not  that  it  was  Jesus,  then  "  the  dis- 
ciple whom  Jesus  loved  saith  unto  Peter,  '  It  is  the 
Lord.' "  It  is  John  who  here  discloses  and  points  out 
Christ  to  Peter. 


S.  PETER  AND   S.  JOHN  287 

Again,  the  Old  Testament  spirit  is  seen  in  Peter's 
conduct  at  the  transfiguration.  He  is  bewildered, 
and  not  discerning  Christ's  superiority  to  Moses  and 
Elias,  says,  "  Master,  let  us  make  here  three  taber- 
nacles," "  for  he  wist  not  what  to  say."  He  comes, 
exhibiting  the  same  Jewish  temper  in  respect  to 
morals,  asking  of  Christ,  "  How  oft  shall  my  brother 
sin  against  me  and  I  forgive  him;  seven  times?" 
In  like  manner,  not  discerning  our  Lord's  right  to 
exemption  from  the  temple  tax,  because  it  was  his 
Father's  house,  he  compromises  His  Master's  claims 
by  telling  the  tax  collectors  that  it  is  due  from  Christ. 
S.  John  falls  into  his  own  grave  errors  likewise,  but 
they  have  reference  to  the  new  kingdom.  He  begins 
to  exercise  authority  before  it  had  been  conferred  on 
him :  "  Master,  we  saw  one  casting  out  devils  in  Thy 
name,  and  we  forbade  him,  because  he  followeth  not 
with  us."  Peter,  with  the  old  Messianic,  earthly 
triumph  in  view,  says,  "Behold,  we  have  forsaken 
all,  and  followed  Thee :  what  shall  we  have  there- 
fore?" S.  John,  looking  beyond  temporal  things, 
with  right  vision  but  with  ambitious  heart,  says, 
"  Master,  grant  unto  us  that  we  may  sit  one  on  Thy 
right  hand  and  the  other  on  Thy  left  hand  in  Thy 
glory." 

The  rebukes  which  our  Lord  administered  to  them, 
and  He  rebuked  most  those  He  loved,  are  also 
deserving  our  attention.  He  rebuked  the  Twelve 
collectively,  for  their  hardness  of  heart,  want  of  dis- 
cernment, lack  of  trust,  keeping  the  children  from 
Him,  and  for  their  strife  amongst  themselves  for 
pre-eminence.  The  only  title  to  the  latter  was  that 


288          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

of  service.  Every  other  distinction  of  rank  was  for- 
bidden. "  It  shall  not  be  so  among  you."  But  to 
none  did  He  utter  such  severe  and  humiliating  re- 
proofs as  to  Peter  and  John.  Peter,  voicing  Israel's 
carnal  mind,  would  not  have  our  Lord  be  a  suffering 
and  crucified  Messiah,  saying,  "  Be  it  far  from  Thee, 
O  Lord,  this  shall  not  be  unto  Thee ! "  And  our 
Lord  rebuked  him,  saying,  "  Get  thee  behind  me, 
Satan;  thou  art  an  offence  to  me."  Again,  when 
Peter  drew  his  sword,  appealing,  as  earthly  kings 
may  do,  to  force,  the  Lord  rebuked  this  idea  of 
earthly  power  and  said,  "  Put  up  thy  sword  into 
its  sheath."  S.  John,  giving  way  to  his  natural 
temper,  falls  into  his  own  sin.  In  his  burning  zeal 
he  would,  Boanerges-like,  call  down  fire  from  heaven. 
to  consume  Christ's  enemies.  It  was  not  the  spirit 
of  the  gospel.  Christ  rebuked  His  loved  disciple 
with  the  withering  words :  "  Ye  know  not  what  spirit 
ye  are  of." 

Further,  let  us  consider  Christ's  questions  to  the 
two.  "  Peter, "  we  read,  "  and  they  that  were  with 
him,  followed  after  Christ."  The  Master's  object 
was  to  bring  Israel  to  a  confession  of  His  true 
nature.  Thus  the  crucial  question  He  at  last  puts 
to  Peter  is:  "Whom  do  ye  say  that  I  the  Son  of 
Man  am?"  But  the  crucial  question  He  puts  to 
the  loved  disciple  is:  "Are  ye  able?"  "Are  ye 
able  to  drink  of  the  cup  that  I  shall  drink  of  and 
to  be  baptized  with  the  baptism  that  I  am  baptized 
with?"  Voicing  believing  Israel,  Peter  said,  "Thou 
art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the'  living  God."  John, 
speaking  in  the  strength  of  the  grace  of  the  new 


S.  PETER   AND   S.  JOHN  289 

dispensation,  said,  "  We  are  able."  Prevenient  grace 
is  given  to  the  Jew  to  discern  Christ.  Sanctifying, 
indwelling  grace  is  given  to  the  Christian  to  become 
like  Him. 

Each  of  the  Apostles  needed  spiritual  transfor- 
mation. S.  Peter  needed  conversion  to  Christ;  S. 
John,  conformity  to  His  Spirit.  Peter's  natural  lack 
was  want  of  faith.  Our  Lord  so  addresses  him :  "  O 
thou  of  little  faith !  "  S.  John,  in  his  natural  heat, 
would  call  down  fire  on  Christ's  enemies.  S.  Peter 
was  great,  warm-hearted,  affectionate,  sympathetic, 
and  impulsive.  S.  John  was  very  unlike  the  popular 
conception  of  him.  He  was  no  soft,  gentle,  tender- 
hearted person.  He  was  awful  and  sublime  in  the 
singleness  and  purity  of  his  soul.  He  loved  not  so 
much  with  passion  or  emotion,  and  never  on  impulse, 
but  with  a  heart  controlled  by  a  will  of  steel.  We 
all,  especially  we  stumblers  and  sinners,  love  Peter, 
and  Peter  ever  attracted  others  about  him.  They 
followed  Peter.  He  bravely  goes  as  the  pioneer  out 
of  the  boat  to  meet  Christ.  He  is  a  leader  and  he 
leads  the  way.  S.  John,  ere  his  nature  had  been 
mellowed  and  enriched  by  grace,  walked,  with  won- 
derful insight  indeed,  into  divine  mysteries,  but  for 
the  most  part  alone.  Our  Lord  said  to  Peter,  point- 
ing out  and  asking  about  the  fig-tree,  a  symbol  of  the 
Judaism,  that  had  withered  away,  "  Have  faith."  Our 
Lord  loved  John  that  by  His  love  there  might  be 
developed  in  him  the  charity  that  is  divine.  Our 
Lord  said  to  him,  "  Behold  thy  mother."  One 
needed  perfection  in  faith ;  the  other  to  be  perfected 
in  love. 


290         CHRISTIAN   AND    CATHOLIC 

Having  in  mind  the  representative  character  of 
S.  Peter,  it  is,  moreover,  interesting  to  study  the  pro- 
cess of  his  conversion.  The  miraculous  sign  of  the 
great  catch  of  fish  at  Christ's  word  brings  to  Peter 
that  which  is  the  basis  of  all  true  conversion,  the  deep 
sense  of  his  own  sinfulness.  Falling  on  his  knees,  he 
cries  out,  "  Depart  from  me,  for  I  am  a  sinful  man, 
O  Lord  !  "  Then  gradually  he  is  brought  by  divine 
help  to  confess  Christ:  "Thou  art  the  Christ,  the 
Son  of  God."  Then,  trusting  in  his  own  strength, 
boasting  that  "  though  all  shall  be  offended  yet  will 
not  I,"  he  falls.  He  who  confessed  the  true  faith, 
that  Christ  is  the  Son  of  God,  denies  that  faith,  say- 
ing, "  I  know  not  the  man."  But  the  prayer  of  our 
great  Advocate  availed  for  his  recovery.  Satan  had 
asked  to  sift  the  Apostles  as  wheat ;  but  Christ  had 
prayed  for  their  leader  that  his  faith  fail  not.  Christ 
did  not  pray  that  Peter  should  not  deny  the  faith, 
but  that,  denying  it,  his  faith  in  Christ  should  not  fail. 
So,  on  his  bitter  weeping  and  repentance,  he  is  for- 
given, and  on  his  threefold  reversal  of  his  thrice-denial, 
he  is  restored.  Converted,  he  is  to  strengthen  his 
brethren,  feed  after  Pentecost  the  lambs  of  the  new 
kingdom,  and  guide  to  Christ  the  sheep  of  the  old. 
He  is  now,  in  his  great  office  as  leader,  to  draw  the 
unbroken  net  to  Christ  standing  on  the  shore.  He 
brings  what  has  been  gathered  by  the  co-operation 
of  both  dispensations  to  the  risen  Christ,  to  partici- 
pate in  the  full  blessings  and  gifts  of  the  gospel  cove- 
nant ;  to  the  living  coals  of  fire  of  the  Holy  Spirit ; 
to  incorporation  into  the  Incarnate  One ;  and  to 
feeding  on  the  bread  that  Jesus  gives  His  own. 


S.  PETER  AND   S.  JOHN  291 

The  relative  spiritual  positions  of  the  two  Apostles 
is  further  seen  at  the  Last  Supper,  where  S.  Peter 
earnestly  asks  our  Lord  to  wash  not  his  feet  only,  but 
his  hands  and  head.  What  an  acknowledgment  of 
the  intellectual  and  moral  Jewish  condition !  It 
needed  a  cleansing  both  in  will  and  heart  and  mind. 
Here,  too,  while  John  is  seen  resting  on  Jesus,  a  type 
of  Christ  and  His  Church,  Peter,  being  troubled, 
desires  to  know  who  will  betray  Him.  But  he  seeks 
the  solution  of  the  mystery,  not  directly  from  Christ 
Himself,  but  indirectly  through  John.  It  is  not  of 
John  to  seek  through  Peter,  for  the  Christian  comes 
not  to  Christ  through  the  law,  but  it  is  Peter  who 
asks  through  John ;  for  Israel,  through  the  Gospel, 
comes  to  Christ. 

Both  Apostles  follow  Christ  to  the  judgment  hall. 
Peter  remains  without.  John  enters  within.  Peter, 
like  Israel,  starting  aside,  falls  away.  John  remains 
faithful  to  the  end.  At  the  cross,  S.  John  and  the 
Blessed  Mother  are  to  be  found,  in  different  ways, 
types  of  the  Church. 

The  resurrection  also  is  full  of  the  symbolic  mean- 
ing we  have  unfolded.  We  find  on  the  day  itself  the 
two  Apostles  together.  Christ  had  sent  these  two, 
Peter  and  John,  to  prepare  the  passover.  Both  dis- 
pensations had  part  in  that  He  both  fulfilled  and 
instituted.  They  were  together  near  Him  at  the 
transfiguration,  where  the  law  and  Prophets  bore 
witness  to  Him,  and  where  He  revealed  Himself  as 
the  Light  that  had  come.  They  were  together  near 
Him  in  the  garden,  for  Jew  and  Gentile  needs  alike 
for  salvation  to  be  gathered  into  union  with  His 


292          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

passion.  They  also  went  together  to  His  tomb. 
There  Peter,  like  the  law,  enters  in  first,  and  then 
departs.  It  is  all  dark  to  him.  But  John,  entering 
in,  sees  and  believes.  The  tomb  for  him  is  bright 
with  the  revealed  glory  of  the  resurrection. 

To  penitents  our  Lord  first  disclosed  Himself.  So 
it  is  He  speaks  first  to  Mary  Magdalene,  seeks  out 
the  two  wandering  disciples,  and  so,  as  most  need- 
ing it,  sends  a  message  to  broken-hearted  Peter: 
"  Go  and  tell  Peter."  As  type  of  restored  Israel, 
and  of  Peter  to  his  Apostleship,  our  Lord  says 
to  him,  "Feed  my  lambs;  tend  my  sheep."  But 
in  contrast  with  this,  our  Lord  gives  to  S.  John 
the  care  of  His  Blessed  Mother,  and  says  of  John, 
symbolical  of  the  enduring  life  of  the  Christian 
Church,  "What  and  if  I  will  that  he  tarry  till  I 
come." 

We  have  rested  our  exposition  on  the  Word  alone. 
But  if  traditions  may  be  cited  for  their  illustrative 
value,  the  legend  declares  how  at  last  Peter,  con- 
demned to  death,  and  fleeing  from  it,  was  met  by  our 
Lord,  who  said,  "  Peter,  where  goest  thou  ?  "  Noble 
and  glorious  was  his  martyrdom  we  confess.  But 
when  John  had  been  apprehended  and  dipped  into 
the  oil,  to  be  made  a  living  flambeau,  then  we  read 
that,  as  a  type  of  the  Christian  Church,  against  which 
nothing  can  prevail  and  which  will  last  till  the  Lord 
comes  again,  S.  John  was,  by  some  miracle  of  provi- 
dence, delivered  and  preserved.  He  lingers  on, 
surviving  all  the  Apostles,  the  organ  of  communication 
between  heaven  and  earth,  and  revealing  to  the 
Church  the  mind  of  the  ascended  Lord. 


S.  PETER  AND   S.  JOHN  293 

Now  if  this  be  the  Holy  Spirit's  exposition  of  that 
word  He  inspired,  it  will  enlighten  all  humble  minds 
and  keep  them  from  seeing  in  the  rightful  pre-emi- 
nence of  S.  Peter  any  proof  of  the  wrongful  supremacy 
assigned  him  by  Rome. 

NOTE.    See  page  285. 

In  the  Resurrection,  Christ  is  seen  standing  on  the  shore.  John 
reveals  Him  to  Peter.  Peter  draws  the  net  through  the  water,  a 
type  of  the  initial  sacrament  of  baptism,  to  Christ,  just  as  he  brings 
the  sheep  and  lambs  of  the  old  and  new  dispensation  to  Him. 


CHAPTER  XVI 

S.   PETER  AT  ROME 

IT  is  claimed  by  Romans  that  Christ  established 
for  the  government  of  His  Church  two  entirely 
separate  powers,  the  priesthood  and  the  primacy. 
The  pope,  therefore,  is  not  to  be  regarded  as  the  first 
in  rank  of  all  bishops,  not  as  a  prince  or  primate 
among  brethren,  but  he  belongs  to  a  distinct  official 
class,  of  which  he  is  the  sole  occupant.  As  the 
supreme  ruler  of  the  Church  he  is  "  in  possession  of 
supreme  power  and  of  the  plenitude  of  power,  as  his 
own  power." 

"  This  plenitude  of  power  includes  that  which 
belongs  to  the  legislative,  judicial,  and  coercive  de- 
partments of  government.  The  pope  can  make  laws 
which  bind  the  whole  Church,  and,  in  the  vacancy  of 
the  see,  the  making  of  a  universal  law  is  impossible. 
By  divine  right  he  is  supreme  judge  and  he  is  the 
ultimate  judge  of  all  causes,  and  from  his  judgment 
there  is  no  appeal.  The  Apostolic  see  is  not  one  of 
several  of  its  kind,  but  is  unique.  It  is  supreme  and 
can  be  judged  by  none.  As  possessed  of  coercive 
power,  the  supreme  pontiff  has  the  powers  of  binding 
and  loosing  independent  of  any  one.  Christ  gave  the 
keys  of  the  kingdom,  not  to  the  episcopate,  but  to 
the  pontificate. 


S.  PETER  AT   ROME  295 

"  The  pontiff  has  also  supreme  liturgical  power  for 
the  regulation  of  the  offering  of  the  sacrifice,  the 
ministration  of  the  sacraments,  all  things  which  per- 
tain to  public  worship.  He  is  the  bishop  of  the 
whole  world,  episcopus  et  urbis  et  orbis.  Nothing 
can  be  done  lawfully  against  his  will;  and  every 
power  within  the  kingdom  is  directly  dependent  on 
him.  The  jurisdiction  of  any  bishop  can  be  validly 
withdrawn  by  him  even  without  any  adequate  cause 
and  without  giving  reason.  Bishops  obtain  their 
mission  immediately  from  Christ's  vicar.  They 
must  all  style  themselves  '  bishops  by  the  grace  of 
God  and  of  the  Apostolic  see.'  All  patriarchs, 
primates,  archbishops,  bishops,  are  bound  to  visit 
Rome  periodically  and  report  in  person.  They  must 
receive  anew  their  '  faculties '  to  exercise  certain 
episcopal  powers  for  a  limited  term  of  years.  The 
pope  can  withhold  them  at  his  pleasure."  1  Such  in 
part  are  the  prerogatives  claimed  by  the  bishop  of 
Rome,  as  set  forth  by  approved  Roman  writers. 

But  on  what  grounds  are  we  asked  to  submit  to 
the  papacy?  Any  true  lover  of  Christ  desirous  of 
knowing  the  truth  and  obeying  it  will  seriously  ask 
himself,  how  can  these  papal  claims  be  proved?  Did 
S.  Peter  himself  realize  that  he  possessed  this  su- 
preme authority?  Is  there  any  evidence  in  Scripture 
to  prove  that  he  exercised  it?  Did  the  Apostles 
recognize  this  alleged  difference  between  the  priest- 
hood and  this  pontificate?  Have  they  left  us  any 
proof  of  their  acknowledgment  of  Peter's  superiority 
to  the  collective  priesthood?  Did  Peter  himself,  feel- 

1  Urbs  et  Orbis,  Humphrey,  S.  J.,  ch  i. 


296         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

ing  its  grace  and  importance,  formally  and  in  some 
public  manner,  which  should  be  a  witness  for  all  time, 
transmit  it  to  any  successor,  or  with  it  endow  any 
see?  If  Rome  claims  it,  when  and  how  was  the 
transfer  formally  made  by  Peter  to  that  see? 

It  is  only  the  last  proposition  with  which  we  are 
here  chiefly  concerned.  It  is  certainly  an  important 
one.  Romans  make,  as  we  have  seen,  a  distinction 
between  the  priesthood,  as  embodied  in  the  episco- 
pate, and  the  papacy.  They  are  obliged  to  do  this; 
otherwise  their  theory  would  fall  to  pieces.  For  the 
pope  does  not  ordain  his  successor.  Nor  does  the 
new  pope  succeed  to  the  papacy  as  a  king  does,  who, 
by  virtue  of  his  birth,  becomes  the  monarch  immedi- 
ately on  the  death  of  his  predecessor.  The  new 
pope  succeeds  by  an  election,  and  so  there  is 
necessarily  an  interval  longer  or  shorter  before  the 
vacancy  is  filled.  In  some  cases  it  has  been  as  long 
as  a  year  and  a  half  or  two  years.  Therefore,  there 
is  no  personal  transmission  of  authority  from  Peter 
through  successors  to  the  new  incumbent.  The  link 
is  broken  at  every  vacancy.  How,  then,  does  the  pope 
become  possessed  of  this  supreme  authority?  The 
only  answer  that  can  be  given  is  that  it  is  an  authority 
and  pledged  assistance  of  infallibility  attached  to  an 
office.  And,  moreover,  if  the  claim  of  the  papacy  is 
to  be  made  good,  that  this  office  was,  having  been 
received  by  Peter,  by  Peter  originally  attached  to  the 
see  of  Rome,  it  is  therefore  incumbent  upon  Romans 
to  prove,  by  sure  and  certain  evidence,  that  this  was 
done. 

It  is  therefore  necessary  for  Romans  to  prove  some- 


S.  PETER  AT   ROME  297 

thing  more  than  that  Peter  visited  Rome,  or  was 
martyred  there,  or  even  consecrated  there  a  bishop, 
or  with  S.  Paul  founded  the  see.  He  visited  Antioch 
we  know  from  Holy  Scripture,  and  probably  con- 
secrated a  bishop  there,  who  had  charge  of  the 
"  circumcision."  So,  either  with  or  without  such 
limitation,  we  may  suppose  him  to  have  done  at 
Rome.  All  this,  if  proven,  would  fall  far  short  of  the 
evidence  required  to  establish  the  present  papal 
claims.  For  the  pope  cannot  be,  as  we  have  seen, 
the  successor  of  S.  Peter  by  consecration.  If  he 
consecrated  Linus,  Linus  consecrated  no  successor. 
The  pope  succeeds  by  an  election  to  this  alleged 
office  of  supreme  pontiff.  This  office  as  one  distinct 
from  the  episcopate  must  have  been  attached  by 
Peter  to  the  see  of  Rome.  A  personal  authority 
cannot  be  transferred  without  explicit  permission  in 
the  original  grant  to  do  so,  and  when  transferred  the 
act  or  mode  of  transference  must  be  explicitly 
proved. 

No  churchman  can  rightly  allow  of  the  existence 
of  an  office,  as  essential  to  the  existence  of  the 
Church  as  is  that  of  the  priesthood,  without  proof 
equally  clear  as  exists  in  the  case  of  the  ministry  of 
the  creation  of  that  office  and  the  mode  by  which  it 
was  to  be  filled  and  perpetuated.  It  is  therefore 
incumbent  on  papal  advocates  to  prove  that  the 
office  of  supreme  pontiff  was  formally  created  by 
Christ,  given  to  Peter,  and  by  Peter  as  formally  con- 
nected with  the  see  of  Rome. 

Let  us  then  see  what  the  evidence  of  Peter's  con- 
nection with  Rome  is.  It  is  noticeable  that  it  is  only 


298         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

argumentative  or  circumstantial.  Dr.  Dollinger  puts 
the  first  in  the  best  form.  It  had  been  contended  by 
some  that  S.  Peter  could  not  have  been  at  Rome 
previous  to  S.  Paul's  advent,  because  the  latter  says 
his  rule  was  "  not  to  build  upon  another's  founda- 
tion." This,  we  might  grant,  would  not  forbid  his 
writing  a  letter  to  the  Romans.  Dr.  Dollinger  says 
that  Paul  had  been  detained  in  Asia,  in  observance 
of  his  rule,  but  now  that  he  was  on  his  journey  to 
Spain  he  could  visit  Rome  on  the  way.  He  was 
unwilling  to  undertake  a  regular  Apostolic  visitation, 
because  the  foundation  was  already  laid  at  Rome. 
If  laid,  Dr.  Dollinger  argued,  it  could  not  have  been 
by  ordinary  believers,  for  Paul's  rule  would  not  for- 
bid him  to  preach  where  the  Gospel  had  been  pre- 
viously preached,  but  only  where  there  was  an 
Apostolic  foundation ;  and  so,  as  no  other  Apostle 
could  have  laid  it,  it  must  have  been  by  S.  Peter. 
As  to  Paul's  remaining  at  Rome  for  two  years  in  his 
own  hired  house,  he  was  then  there,  not  by  his  own 
will,  but  as  a  prisoner. 

Concerning  the  strength  of  this  argument,  it  leaves 
out  of  account  the  fact  that  Paul  did  not  wish  merely 
to  stop  over  at  Rome-junction  on  his  way  to  Spain, 
but  had  a  long-settled  purpose  to  visit  the  great 
world's  capital  as  part  of  his  legitimate  Gentile  mis- 
sionary field.  We  find  him  saying,1  "  After  I  have 
been  there  (Jerusalem)  I  must  also  see  Rome."  He 
must  have  regarded  it  as  belonging  to  his  jurisdiction, 
and  assigned  to  him  by  the  highest  authority.  For 
the  Lord  had  appeared  to  him  and  given  him  an 

1  Acts  xix.  21. 


S.  PETER  AT   ROME  299 

express  command  to  go  thither.  "  As  thou  hast 
testified  of  Me  in  Jerusalem,  so  must  thou  bear  wit- 
ness also  at  Rome."  1  We  do  not,  therefore,  think  the 
argument  that  assumes  for  its  premise  that  Paul 
avoided  an  official  stay  at  Rome,  and  so  concludes 
that  Peter  must  have  been  there,  is  of  much  force. 

When  we  examine  the  evidence  of  Peter's  visit, 
it  divides  itself  into  two  classes,  which  may  be  called 
the  romantic  and  the  ecclesiastic  account.  To  the 
former  we  owe  the  story  of  Peter's  early  visit  to 
Rome,  his  contest  there  with  the  magician  Simon 
Magus,  and  his  twenty-five  years'  episcopate.  The 
first  beginnings  of  this  legend  are  found  in  Justin 
Martyr  in  the  second  century,  who  mentions  the  visit 
of  Simon  to  Rome  and  the  erection  there  of  a  statue 
to  him.  The  discovery  in  1572  of  the  probable  statue 
with  its  inscription,  which  Justin  mistranslated,  shows 
it  to  have  been  erected  in  honor  of  a  Sabine  god. 
Then  in  the  Clementine  romance  the  account  was 
given  of  the  contest  between  Simon  Magus  and  the 
Apostle.  Simon  Magus  proposed  to  fly  in  the 
Emperor's  presence,  and  in  answer  to  Peter's  prayers 
he  falls  to  the  ground.  Eusebius,  who  wrote  in  the 
fourth  century,  adds  the  gathered  surmises,  and 
the  statement  of  the  twenty-five  years'  episcopate. 
This  last  theory  requires  Peter  to  have  gone  to  Rome 
after  his  miraculous  release  from  imprisonment,  and 
to  have  returned  after  the  Council  of  Jerusalem.  Of 
such  a  journey  and  return  there  is  no  evidence.  All 
that  Scripture  says  is  that  Peter  "  departed  and  went 
into  another  place."  None  of  the  great  ecclesiastical 

1  Acts  xxiii.  II. 


300         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

historians  of  to-day  accept  the  story  in  Eusebius  as  a 
verified  or  established  historical  fact.  It  has  all  the 
elements,  in  origin  arid  growth,  which  mark  the 
development  of  the  myth,  and  may  be  dismissed  as 
unhistorical. 

When  we  take  up  the  historical  evidence,  that  of 
the  first  two  or  three  centuries  is  circumstantial  and 
scanty.  But  that  is  all  we  have.  There  is  no  record 
of  it,  where  we  should  have  a  right  to  require  it,  viz., 
in  Holy  Scripture.  In  excuse  for  its  absence,  Cardinal 
Gibbons  says,  "  For  the  same  reason  we  might  deny 
that  S.  Paul  was  beheaded  in  Rome,  that  S.  John 
died  in  Ephesus."  As,  however,  no  article  of  the 
Christian  faith  depends  on  these  last-mentioned 
events,  no  reason  exists  why  they  should  be  matters 
of  scriptural  .record.  But  being  essential  to  the 
dogma  of  the  Roman  supremacy,  and  our  being 
members  of  Christ's  Church,  it  is  fatally  significant 
that  scriptural  proof  of  Peter's  visit  is  lacking. 

Not  only  is  this  wanting,  but  there  are  no  contem- 
poraneous witnesses  to  a  fact  so  essential,  and  upon 
which  it  is  claimed  the  whole  structure  of  the  Christian 
Church  depends.  Nor  in  the  apologists,  or  defenders 
of  the  Church,  in  the  second  century,  where,  if  it  were 
a  matter  of  importance,  it  would  surely  find  a  place, 
is  it  to  be  found. 

What,  then,  do  we  find  in  its  favor?  S.  Peter  closes 
an  epistle:  "The  co-elect  one  (feminine  gender)  in 
Babylon  saluteth  you,  together  with  Marcus  my  son." 
Some  have  supposed  that,  as  we  know  S.  Peter  was 
married,  his  wife,  who  was  at  Babylon,  is  here  re- 
ferred to ;  others  that  S.  Peter  was  there  himself  and 


S.  PETER  AT  ROME  301 

wrote  from  Babylon.  Just  as  S.  Paul,  as  the  Apostle 
to  the  Gentile  world,  would  most  naturally  desire  to 
visit  the  world's  capital,  so  Peter,  the  special  Apostle 
to  the  Jews,  would  naturally  be  greatly  drawn  to  visit 
Babylon,  the  place  of  their  great  captivity.  The 
order  in  which  he  mentions  in  his  epistle  the  coun- 
tries adjacent  to  his  abode  beginning  with  those 
nearest  is  somewhat  corroborative  of  Babylon  being 
then  his  residence.  It  is  thought  by  others  that  by 
"  Babylon "  Rome  is  meant.  Commentators  differ 
and  the  solution  remains  in  doubt.  But  if  indeed  the 
Holy  Spirit  has  thus  concealed  the  true  fact  from  us, 
whatever  it  was  it  is  a  natural  inference  that  He 
would  not  have  us  base  anything  of  Church  doctrine 
upon  it.  This  is  a  more  reasonable  supposition  than 
that  Peter  through  fear  sought  to  conceal  his  where- 
abouts. 

The  next  bit  of  evidence  offered  is  in  S.  Clement's 
Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  at  the  close  of  the  first 
century.  In  it  the  name  of  Peter  has  been  restored 
in  chapter  v.  by  conjecture,  the  syllable  "  os  "  being 
all  that  can,  in  the  manuscript,  be  discerned.  He 
refers,  filling  this  out  as  Peter,  to  Peter  and  Paul  as 
combatants  "  who  have  been  nearest  to  us,"  who 
suffered  martyrdom.  This  is  obviously  very  indefi- 
nite, and,  upon  an  issue  upon  which  men's  salvation  is 
said  to  depend,  of  little  worth.  S.  Ignatius,  who  wrote 
about  105,  said  in  a  letter  to  the  Roman  Christians: 
'  I  do  not  charge  you  like  Peter  and  Paul,  who  are 
Apostles."  This  does  not  state  that  they  were  ever 
at  Rome,  for  Ignatius  might  in  his  humility  only  be 
saying  that  he,  their  successor  in  the  see  of  Antioch, 


302         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

could  not  address  them  with  the  Apostolic  authority 
of  his  predecessors.  The  earliest  explicit  statement 
in  extant  authors  that  we  have  of  Peter's  visit  to 
Rome,  is  found  in  Irenaeus,  in  his  work  on  heresies. 
It  is  supposed  to  be  written  after  his  consecration  as 
Bishop  of  Lyons,  in  170  A.D.  He  speaks  of  that  most 
famous  Church  "  founded  and  constituted  at  Rome 
by  the  two  most  glorious  Apostles,  Peter  and  Paul." 

In  a  rhetorical  phrase,  Tertullian,1  makes  the 
earliest  mention  of  the  Apostle's  martyrdom  at 
Rome.  Fermillian  makes  an  allusion  to  the  two 
Apostles  as  founders  of  the  Roman  Church.  These 
writers  do  not  claim  to  have  had  access  to  any 
original  sources  of  information,  and  were  probably 
following  statements  previously  made.  When  we 
come  to  Eusebius  in  the  fourth  century,  we  find  him 
quoting  from  writings  which  are  not  extant,  from 
Papias,  Dionysius,  a  Roman  presbyter  Caius,  and 
Origen,  the  latter  being  the  first  to  state,  if  that  is  the 
right  translation  of  his  words,  that  Peter  was  crucified 
with  his  head  downwards.  For  the  reasons  that  this 
evidence  is  late,  and  second  hand,  and  also  cannot  be 
verified,  we  should  be  justified  in  rejecting  it.  For 
this  is  not  like  an  ordinary  historical  question.  It  is 
one  on  which  most  important  issues  depend,  —  an  issue 
more  important  than  life  or  death.  Nothing  less  is  at 
stake  than  whether  we  are  in  the  church  that  Christ 
founded  or  not.  Romans  deny  that  we  are  in  Christ's 
Church,  and  consequently  that  we  have  no  covenanted 
pledge  of  salvation.  In  denying  this  to  us,  on  the 
ground  of  the  special  endowment  of  the  Roman  see, 

1  Ad  Marcion,  iv.  5. 


S.  PETER   AT   ROME  303 

the  burden  of  proof  is  on  them  to  prove  it  was  so 
endowed. 

But  as  our  wish  is  to  state,  as  strongly  as  the  facts 
will  allow,  the  Roman  side,  let  us  admit  it.  There  is 
a  late  ingenious  argument  by  the  Rev.  Fr.  Barnes 
rendering  it  quite  probable  that  the  tomb  of  the 
Apostle  still  rests  below  the  crypt  of  the  present 
S.  Peter's.  The  strongest  argument,  we  think,  is  the 
uncontradicted  tradition,  which  found  expression 
in  the  Church's  councils.  Upon  this  evidence  a 
number  of  writers,  Calvin  and  Bishop  Pearson, 
Alford,  and  others,  accept  the  account,  so  far  as 
relates  to  the  visit  and  martyrdom  under  Nero,  and 
the  foundation  in  common  by  Peter  and  Paul  of  the 
Roman  see.  But  all  this  does  not  prove  the  posses- 
sion or  the  transference  by  S.  Peter  to  the  see  of 
that  special  office  of  supreme  pontiff  which  Rome 
claims  to-day  to  be  her  original  endowment. 

There  are  three  comments  we  desire  to  make. 

1.  While  the  evidence  may  be  such  as  to  warrant 
our   acceptance,    as    probable    historical    events,   of 
Peter's  visit,  martyrdom,  and  joint  founding  with  Paul 
of  the  see,  it  is  not  such  as  to  warrant  Romans  in  un- 
churching those  who  cannot  accept  it,  as  proving, 
what  it  fails  to  do,  the  endowment  by  S.  Peter  of  that 
see  with  supreme  monarchical  power.     If  one  sitting 
on  a  jury  would  not  take  away  a  man's  life  on  such 
inconclusive  evidence,  surely  one  ought  not  to  con- 
demn, by  unchurching  him,  a  brother  to  the  peril  of 
what  is  worse,  —  eternal  loss. 

2.  According  to  the    admission  of  some    Roman 
writers  all  possible  doubt  of  Peter's  consecration  of 


304          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

Linus  is  not  by  this  evidence  excluded.  At  the  best, 
it  must  be  allowed,  it  falls  short  of  absolute  demonstra- 
tion or  certainty.  All  one  can  fairly  say  is  that  the  pre- 
dominating weight  of  probability  is  on  that  side. 
But  that  being  so,  what  becomes  of  the  vast  super- 
structure, culminating  in  the  papal  infallibility,  that 
is  built  upon  it?  Infallibility  cannot  logically  rest  on 
probability.  It  is  like  trying  to  build  a  pyramid  on  a 
foundation  of  eggs. 

3.  Every  doctrine  contained  in  the  creed  which 
involves  a  fact  has  that  fact  recorded  in  Holy 
Scripture.  The  birth,  crucifixion,  resurrection  of 
Christ,  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Spirit  are  examples. 
If  the  Church  is  so  connected  with  the  holy  see 
that  we  must  say,  as  the  Romans  do  in  their  creed  as 
set  forth  by  Pope  Pius  IV.  and  of  universal  obligation, 
"  I  believe  in  the  Holy  Roman  Church,"  then  the 
visit  of  Peter  and  his  endowment  of  that  see  with  his 
prerogatives  should  be  proved  in  like  manner.  The 
Holy  Spirit,  we  may  reverently  say,  would  not  have 
omitted  to  do  so  in  this  case,  if  it  were  true,  any 
more  than  in  the  others.  And  therefore,  as  Christians, 
we  must  conclude  that  there  is  no  such  evidence 
given  us  as  will  warrant  our  making  belief  in  the 
Roman  Church,  with  its  monarchical  pontiff,  and  its 
claim  to  be  the  whole  Church,  a  part  of  our  Creed. 


CHAPTER   XVII 
THE    ROMAN    CLAIM 

THE  Roman  claim  is  not  that  the  bishop  of 
Rome  is  entitled  to  the  first  position  of  honor 
and  primacy  in  the  Church  by  virtue  of  its  canon 
law.  This,  all  Catholics  will  admit,  certainly  was 
once  his  position.  Is  it  asked  why,  if  we  admit  this, 
should  we  not  by  joining  Rome  recognize  it?  The 
answer  is  twofold.  First,  because  Rome  has  re- 
pudiated this  as  her  true  position,  and  anathematizes 
those  who  hold  it,  and  we  could  not  submit  to  her 
without  acknowledging  an  authority  essentially  dif- 
ferent. And  secondly,  according  to  canon  law, 
whatever  Rome  may  have  had  she,  by  excess  of 
claim,  has  now  forfeited.  Excess  of  privilege  is  de- 
structive of  the  privilege  itself.  "  Privilegium  omnino 
meretur  amittere  qui  permissa  sibi  abutitur  potes- 
tate"  1  As  Archdeacon  Manning,  in  his  "  Unity  of 
the  Church," 2  wrote,  "  The  defeat  of  the  pope's 
canonical  privileges  is  with  himself." 

What,  however  Rome  claims,  is  not  a  primacy 
either  given  by  canon  law,  or  in  other  way.  The 
underlying  fallacy  of  many  Roman  arguments  is  that 
they  cite  ancient  authorities  in  favor  of  a  primacy, 

1  "The  Privilege  of  Peter."     Jenkins,  pp.  7-40.     Decret.  p.  n. 
dist.  xi.  c.  63. 

2  Page  364. 


306         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

which  fall  short  of  proving  their  claim  to  a  supremacy. 
The  two  are  widely  apart.  Rome  does  not  assert 
that  Peter,  and  so  the  bishop  of  Rome,  was  first 
among  peers,  because  in  their  high  office  the  popes 
have  no  peers.  The  pope  is  not  first  in  the  order  of 
bishops,  but  as  supreme  pontiff  holds  an  office 
distinct  from  the  episcopate.  Christ,  it  is  claimed, 
established  two  essential  orders,  the  episcopate,  each 
member  of  which  shares  in  its  solidarity,  and  the 
apostolate,  which  now  resides,  in  its  plenitude  of 
jurisdiction,  solely  in  the  pope. 

He  is  the  vicegerent  of  Jesus  Christ.  He  is  the 
supreme  governor  of  the  Church.  It  is  written  of 
him,  "Whatever  power  Jesus  Christ  Himself  could 
exercise  were  He  visibly  present  as  the  head  of  the 
Church,  the  same  does  His  vicar  exercise.  The 
Church  is  bound  to  yield  to  him  the  same  obedience 
which  she  would  give  to  Jesus  Christ,  were  He  to 
demand  it  in  His  own  proper  person.  The  pope  is 
Christ  in  office,  Christ  in  jurisdiction  and  power." 
This  power  extends  over  things  temporal  and  spiritual. 
The  pope  stands  on  the  apex  of  all  authority.  He 
holds  in  his  hands  the  two  swords.  In  the  bull  Unam 
sane t 'am,  the  .pope  claimed  that  "  being  set  above 
kings  and  kingdoms  by  a  divine  pre-eminence  of 
power,  we  dispose  of  them  as  we  think  fit."1  In 
virtue  of  this  power  the  pope  has  absolved  subjects 
from  their  allegiance,  and  claimed  the  right  to  take 
away  their  dominions  from  those  princes  who  would 
not  purge  their  dominions  from  heretics.  In  things 
spiritual  we  are  told  that  "  whatever  of  power,  what- 

1  4.  Lat.  Council. 


THE   ROMAN   CLAIM  307 

ever  of  sacramental  grace,  whatever  of  heavenly  dis- 
pensation is  given  by  Christ  the  head  of  the  Church, 
all  this  is  committed  to  the  pope's  dispensation."  l 
So  that  "  it  is  altogether  necessary  for  salvation  that 
every  human  creature  should  be  subject  to  the  Roman 
pontiff." 

In  relation  to  the  Church  we  read,  "  he  alone  has 
the  right  to  convoke  councils  and  decide  where  they 
shall  be  held,  and  to  preside  over  them  in  person,  or 
by  his  representatives.  Apart  from  him  they  cannot 
act,  so  that  in  the  vacancy  of  the  see,  they  can  de- 
cree nothing.  To  him  it  belongs  to  appoint  all  the 
bishops,  to  transfer  and  depose  them.  He  alone  has 
the  right  to  create,  destroy,  or  change  dioceses,  and 
to  make  and  unmake  archbishops.  It  is  his  to  inter- 
vene in  all  that  concerns  the  general  good  of  the 
Church,  and  to  no  one  on  earth  is  he  accountable. 
He  judges  all,  but  is  judged  by  none.  As  the 
supreme  judge  in  all  causes  that  belong  to  the 
Church,  recourse  may  be  had  to  his  tribunal,  and  no 
appeal  lies  from  him  to  an  Ecumenical  council.  For 
the  exercise  of  his  authority  he  claims  that  an  indepen- 
dent territory  over  which  he  is  to  rule  as  a  temporal 
sovereign  is  needed.  The  proper  exercise  of  the 
spiritual  powers  Christ  gave  him  requires  him  to  be 
an  earthly  king. 

He  is  also  the  supreme  doctor  to  whom  the  assist- 
ance of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  pledged,  that  he  may  in- 
violably keep  and  expound  the  faith,  and  that  his 
ex  cathedra  utterances  in  his  official  capacity  in  faith 
and  morals  may  be  infallible.  Very  naturally  and 

1  Council  of  Basle. 


308          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

well  may  the  faithful  as  the  result  cry  out,  "  We  hail 
thee,  O  Pope  of  Rome,  successor  of  Peter,  as  the  one 
infallible  witness  and  exponent  of  the  truth  on  earth. 
We  bow  before  thy  voice,  O  Pius,  as  before  the  voice 
of  Christ,  the  God  of  truth."  In  the  words  of  an 
approved  Roman  divine,  "  Every  pontiff  is  the  peren- 
nial voice  of  God,  placed  in  the  world  to  teach  and 
guide  all  nations.  He  is  the  heir  and  minister  of  all 
the  powers  of  Christ,  pontiff  and  eternal  king."  The 
pope's  voice  is  a  "  voice  of  heaven,  not  of  earth ;  the 
voice  of  God,  not  of  man.  .  .  .  He  is  the  only  plank  of 
salvation  in  the  terrible  shipwreck  of  perverted  ideas 
and  facts.  .  .  .  He  is  the  only  true  saviour  of  moribund 
society."  The  above,  taken  from  Roman  sources, 
declare  the  pope's  office,  and  how  he  is  regarded. 

He  is  thus  the  Church's  supreme  monarch,  the 
centre  of  unity,  the  source  of  all  jurisdiction,  the  in- 
dependent possessor  of  its  executive,  judicial,  legis- 
lative powers,  and,  as  doctor  and  teacher  of  the 
Church,  apart  from  council  or  general  acceptance, 
infallible. 

The  claim  is  a  tremendous  and  appalling  one.  Did 
our  Lord  bestow  it?  Is  it  set  forth  in  Holy  Scrip- 
ture? Was  it  held  by  the  Apostles?  Was  it  so 
stated  by  the  Fathers?  Was  it  commonly  recog- 
nized throughout  Christendom  that  all  the  bishops 
were  directly  or  indirectly  appointed  by  the  pope? 
Was  it  as  a  matter  of  fact  accepted  as  a  law,  that  all 
their  jurisdiction  came  from  him?  Was  communion 
with  the  pope  the  acknowledged  test  of  being  in  the 
Church?  Were  none  ever  acknowledged  as  saints 
save  those  who  lived  and  died  in  communion  with 


THE   ROMAN   CLAIM  309 

the  holy  see?  Did  the  bishop  of  Rome  always 
summon  the  general  councils  and  preside  over  them 
by  himself  in  person  or  by  his  legates?  Was  the 
monarchical  principle  of  the  papal  supremacy  always 
acted  on  by  all  portions  of  Christendom?  Did  the 
Church  in  times  of  heresy  at  once  appeal  to  the  in- 
fallibility that  rested  in  the  papal  pontiff,  or  did  it 
assemble  in  council?  Can  the  claim  of  privilege, 
which  requires  by  canon  law  positive  and  clear  evi- 
dence of  its  original  gift,  public  exhibition  and  trans- 
mission, be  proved?  The  weight  of  testimony  in 
response  to  these  questions  will  not,  we  believe,  be 
found  On  the  Roman  side.  Let  us,  however,  examine 
the  matter  more  in  detail. 

We  are  met  at  the  outset  by  the  prima  facie  fact 
that  four  out  of  the  five  patriarchates  of  Christendom, 
the  fifth  being  Rome,  or  the  claimant,  deny  and  re- 
ject the  claim,  and  have  done  so  at  the  expense  of 
a  separation  which  has  lasted  nigh  unto  a  thousand 
years.  Looked  at  from  the  orthodox  and  venerable 
East,  and  from  Jerusalem,  which  is  the  Mother  Church 
of  Christendom,  the  rise  of  the  present  monarchical 
papacy  is  seen  to  be  the  result,  in  a  large  part,  of 
human,  worldly  causes,  and  the  expression  of  that 
intellectual  pride  and  independence  which  is  the 
basis  of  Protestantism.  The  pope,  the  East  de- 
clares, was  the  first  Protestant.  He  rebelled  against 
the  Church  universal,  and  because  it  would  not  sub- 
mit to  him  became  a  schismatic,  erecting  an  inde- 
pendent Church,  claiming  like  the  Donatists  of  old, 
to  be  the  whole  and  only  body  of  Christ,  and  deceiv- 
ing the  West,  by  the  forged  decretals,  into  an  accept- 


3io         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

ance  of  his  claims,  and  by  worldly  policy  building  up 
in  the  West  his  assumed  monarchical  powers.  But 
sin  always  finds  man  out,  and  the  sin  the  parent  com- 
mits is  often  visited  upon  him  by  his  children.  If 
Jacob  lied,  his  children  in  turn  lied  to  him.  The 
pope  became  the  first  Protestant  and  rebelled  against 
Christendom,  and  then,  following  his  example,  his 
children  rebelled  against  him.  Entrusted  with  the 
care  of  Western  Europe,  he  lost  the  major  part  of 
it.  When  at  last  the  forgeries  of  the  decretals  were 
discovered,  aroused  by  the  corruption  and  worldli- 
ness  of  the  papacy,  for  whose  reform  cardinals  and 
councils  had  for  years  vainly  pleaded,  the  north  of 
Europe,  awakened  to  the  unevangelical,  legal,  me- 
chanical system  as  then  preached,  revolted,  and 
claiming  the  right  of  private  judgment,  broke  with 
the  papacy.  The  sin  of  the  papacy  came  back  upon 
itself.  It  lost  half  of  Europe,  and  to-day,  confined 
chiefly  to  the  Latin  races,  it  is  seen  to  be  a  decaying 
force  in  Europe.  But  the  East,  though  exposed  to 
terrible  sufferings  and  the  inroads  of  Mahometanism, 
has  survived  its  assaults,  has  accomplished  a  wonder- 
ful missionary  work  of  evangelization  among  the  Tar- 
tar tribes  of  Russia,  and  throughout  the  whole  of  the 
north  of  Asia.  God  has  blest  its  labors.  It  maintains 
the  Catholic  position  and  faith,  as  it  has  come  from 
the  fathers  and  Apostles,  while  it  rejects  the  papacy. 
To  understand  the  papacy  one  must  look  at  it  from 
the  viewpoint  of  the  East  and  Jerusalem.  The  Apos- 
tolic Orthodox  Catholic  churches  of  the  East  have 
repudiated  it  as  not  part  of  the  Catholic  religion.1 

1  "  What  is  Modern  Romanism  ? "  p. 24. 


THE   ROMAN   CLAIM  311 

In  the  face  of  this  testimony  and  that  of  antiquity 
some  have  undertaken  to  defend  the  Roman  claim  by 
the  theory  of  development.  But  "  no  theory  of  de- 
velopment," says  Bishop  Seymour,  "  will  explain  the 
change  from  the  original  government  instituted  by 
Christ  to  the  papacy  as  it  now  exists.  Revolution, 
usurpation,  substitution,  come  between,  not  develop- 
ment. The  change  is  not  such  as  comes  from  growth, 
as  when  a  child  becomes  a  man,  but  such  as  happens 
when  Caesar  strangles  the  republic  and  reigns  su- 
preme." Newman's  theory  of  development,  as  Moz- 
ley  and  Archer  Butler,  as  well  as  the  Roman  Catholic 
Bronson,  showed,  failed  to  satisfactorily  account  for 
the  transformation.1 

That  which  is  a  sufficient  and  should  be  the 
decisive  test  of  the  validity  of  Roman  claims  is  to  be 
found  in  Holy  Scripture.  It  is  all  our  space  allows 
us  to  consider.  What  does  it  disclose  to  us  ?  Does 
it  sustain  the  claim  of  the  bishop  of  Rome  to  be  the 
Church's  absolute  monarch,  —  the  source  of  all  juris- 
diction, its  supreme  governor,  infallible  teacher,  the 
vicar  of  Jesus  Christ  ? 

Now  the  prophetical,  priestly,  and  kingly  powers 
entrusted  to  the  Apostles  were  always  given  to  them 
by  Christ  in  their  corporate  and  collegiate  capacity. 
Our  Lord  said  to  the  Twelve,  in  respect  of  the  teach- 
ing and  judicial  office,  "Whatsoever  ^<?  shall  bind  on 
earth,  shall  be  bound  in  heaven."  He  said  to  them 
assembled  together  in  the  upper  chamber,  "  Offer  this 
as  a  memorial  of  Me."  He  made  them  representa- 
tives of  His  kingly  power  when  He  gave  them  mission 

1  See  note  on  page  329.  2  S.  Matt,  xviii.  17,  18. 


312          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

and  jurisdiction  and  said,  "  Go  ye,  and  make  disciples 
of  all  the  nations."  He  then  gave  to  the  united  apos- 
tolate  their  world-wide  jurisdiction.  Like  as  He  had 
given  them  as  a  body  their  prophetical  and  priestly 
commissions,  so  in  the  days  of  His  royalty  He  gave 
to  them  mission  and  jurisdiction.  Just  as  they  could 
gather  others  into  union  with  their  prophetical  and 
priestly  offices,  so  they  could  apportion  to  others  a 
share  in  their  universal  jurisdiction.  Thus,  we  find 
the  Apostles  assigning  to  Paul  jurisdiction  over  the 
Gentiles,  and  appointing  Peter  to  jurisdiction  over 
the  Jews.1  This  clearly  shows  that  our  Lord  did  not 
give  a  primacy  and  plenary  jurisdiction  to  Peter, 
from  whom  it  was  to  be  given  to  the  other  Apostles, 
but  the  reverse.  This  settles  the  case  of  the  Roman 
claim  to  be  the  one  source  of  jurisdiction. 

It  is  equally  clear  that  S.  Peter  was  not  the  supreme 
governor  of  the  Church  as  it  is  claimed  the  pope  is. 
It  is  claimed  that  the  pope  as  supreme  governor  by 
a  power  derived  from  Peter  appoints  the  bishops, 
transfers  them  of  his  own  motion,  can  depose  them  at 
his  will.  In  the  New  Testament  we  find  Peter  point- 
ing out  a  vacancy  in  the  apostolate,  but  not  filling  it. 
We  do  not  find  him  consecrating  a  single  bishop  or 
ordaining  a  single  priest.  We  find  S.  Paul,  on  the 
other  hand,  without  any  reference  to  S.  Peter,  doing 
these  very  things.  S.  Paul  ordains  elders  and  con- 
secrates S.  Timothy.  Again,  so  far  from  appointing 
any  one  of  the  clergy  to  any  special  jurisdiction,  we 
find  that  S.  Peter  was  himself  sent  on  missionary  duty 
by  the  Apostles.  "  When  the  Apostles  which  were 

1  Gal.  ii.  7. 


THE   ROMAN   CLAIM  313 

in  Jerusalem  heard  that  Samaria  had  received  the 
word  of  God,  they  sent  unto  them  Peter  and  John." 
Peter  did  not  send  the  other  Apostles  at  any  time  to 
any  place.  They  sent  him.  He  was  not  the  supreme 
governor. 

The  pope  claims  that  he  alone  has  the  right  to 
convoke  councils  and  to  preside  over  them  and 
confirm  their  decrees.  In  the  Acts  we  do  not  read 
that  the  first  council  was  called  by  Peter,  but  "  that 
the  Apostles  and  elders  came  together  to  consider 
the  matter."  Nothing  is  said  about  Peter  calling 
them.  Very  clearly  he  did  not  preside.  He  addressed 
the  council,  so  did  the  others.  He  spoke  without 
assuming  an  authority  different  from  the  other  Apo- 
stles. Moreover,  the  decree  ran  not  in  his  name,  but 
in  that  of  "  the  Apostles  and  elders  and  brethren." 
S.  Peter  had  no  exceptional,  judicial,  or  legislative 
authority,  but  only  possessed  such  authority  in  com- 
mon with  the  Apostles. 

What,  we  may  ask,  is  the  testimony  respecting  his 
being  the  centre  of  unity  ?  It  was  to  S.  John,  not  to 
S.  Peter,  that  the  care  of  the  Blessed  Virgin,  the  spe- 
cial type  of  the  Church,  was  committed.  To  S.  John 
especially  was  the  vision  of  the  Church,  in  all  its  parts 
and  workings,  revealed.  He  is  made  keenly  alive  to 
the  faults  and  failings  in  faith  and  practice  of  the 
seven  representative  churches.  If  God  had  estab- 
lished a  centre  of  unity  in  Rome,  it  is  impossible  to 
suppose  it  should  not  have  been  found  in  the  warn- 
ings and  instructions  given  them.  The  seven  churches 
(a  type  of  the  whole  Church)  would  have  been 
earnestly  called  on  to  hear  what  the  Spirit,  "  through 


314          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

Peter,"  says  to  the  churches.  What  we  find  is  that 
the  seven  churches  are  placed  on  the  same  level,  and 
there  is  no  intimation  of  any  church  holding  superi- 
ority over  the  others,  or  one  being  the  centre  of 
church  unity. 

Again,  the  Church  is  represented  as  having  twelve 
gates  and  twelve  foundations,  no  one  of  which  is 
marked  out  as  being  superior  to  any  other.  The 
priesthood  of  the  old  and  new  dispensation  is  repre- 
sented by  the  four  and  twenty  elders,  no  one  of  which 
is  above  his  fellows.  "  Come  hither,"  said  the  angel, 
"  I  will  show  thee  the  Bride,  the  Lamb's  wife.  And 
he  carried  me  away  in  the  Spirit  to  a  great  and  high 
mountain,  and  shewed  me  that  great  city,  the  holy 
Jerusalem.  And  the  wall  of  the  city  had  twelve 
foundations,  and  in  them  the  names  of  the  twelve 
Apostles  of  the  Lamb."1  The  four-squared  city,  we 
may  observe,  was  not,  as  is  popularly  conceived,  in 
the  form  of  a  cube,  but  in  that  of  a  four-sided  Eastern 
cross.  It  was  after  this  fashion  and  order  that  Israel 
marched  through  the  wilderness.  The  Holy  City  has 
consequently  four  arms,  twelve  sides,  a  gate  on  each 
side,  and  its  twelve  corner-stones.  The  head  or  chief 
corner-stone  is  not  placed  on  one  side,  but  is  in  the 
centre,  and  so  is  the  bond  of  union  to  all  the  parts, 
and  the  head  and  corner-stone  is  Christ.  Thus  in 
this  revelation  of  the  Church,  given  by  the  Holy 
Spirit,  there  is  no  special  place  reserved  for  Peter  or 
the  Roman  pontiff.  As  our  Lord  said,  I  am  the  vine, 
and  ye,  including  Peter,  "are  the  branches."  Peter  is 
thus  only  one  branch  among  others,  and  so  too  the 

1  Rev.  xxi.  14. 


THE  ROMAN   CLAIM  315 

heavenly  city  has  twelve  foundations,  and  Peter  is 
only  one  of  them.  This  destroys  the  claim  of  his  being 
different  from  the  others  as  the  centre  of  unity. 

Again,  not  only  in  the  book  of  The  Revelation  does 
the  Holy  Spirit,  who  is  the  guide  of  the  Church  into 
all  truth,  give  us  the  structure  of  the  Church,  but  He 
does  so  in  the  plain,  literal,  explicit  words  of  S.  Paul. 
The  Church  is  the  body  of  Christ.  As  a  body  it 
has  a  head.  Like  a  human  body  it  can  have  only  one 
head.  As  a  divine  society  or  body  it  must  have  a 
divine  head.  This  head  can  be  no  other  than  Christ. 
He  is  a  divine  and  visible  head.  He  is  visible  to  the 
saints  in  glory.  He  is  visible  to  the  waiting  Church, 
as  the  individual  members  of  it  pass  before  His 
judgment  seat.  He  has  visible  and  official  repre- 
sentatives of  Himself  in  the  Church  militant  in  the 
bishops  of  each  diocese,  each  one  of  whom  is  made 
visible  to  all  the  members  of  it  by  the  duties  of  his 
office.  The  pope,  however,  does  not  fulfil  the  re- 
quirement of  being  a  visible  representative  of  the 
unseen  head.  Locally  confined  by  his  office  to  one 
city  he  is  visible  only  to  those  who  dwell  there  or 
visit  him.  But  as  no  obligation  rests  upon  the  faith- 
ful to  visit  Rome,  such  as  compels  each  bishop  to 
meet  his  clergy  and  people,  the  pope  fails  of  being 
a  visible  head.  The  oft-repeated  saying  that  "  a 
visible  Church  must  have  a  visible  head,"  is  just  as 
true  as  that  "  a  divine  Church  must  have  a  divine 
head,"  but  it  does  not  prove  that  the  pope  is  that 
head.  On  the  contrary,  as  a  divine  church  must  have 
a  divine  head  the  head  of  the  church  is  Christ. 

The  question  is,  Did  our  Lord  set  one  Apostle  over 


316          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

all  the  others  and  make  his  successors  to  be  His 
vicegerent  on  earth? 

It  has  been  argued  that  as  every  family  has  a  head 
and  every  nation  a  head,  so  the  Church  militant 
should  have  a  head.  It  is  true  that  every  family  and 
nation  must  have  a  head,  but  not  that  there  should 
be  one  head  over  all  families  and  nations.  Every 
diocese,  as  the  Church  unit,  must  in  like  manner  have 
a  head,  but  it  does  not  follow  that  there  must  be  a 
visible  head  over  all  dioceses.  Christ  did,  however, 
designate  one  who  should  be  His  vicar,  and  did  ap- 
point Him  in  express  terms.  He  would  send  the 
Holy  Ghost,  the  Comforter,  who  should  guide  the 
Church  into  all  truth,  who  should  glorify  Me :  for  He 
!shall  receive  of  Mine,  and  shall  show  it  unto  you. 
To  demand  more,  and  that  there  shall  be  one  visible 
chief  representative  of  Christ's  headship  on  earth,  is 
to  rebel  against  the  ordering  of  Christ.  The  pope, 
therefore,  is  not  the  representative  head  of  Christ  on 
earth. 

Is  the  pope  the  infallible  teacher  and  doctor  in  all 
matters  of  faith  and  morals  ? 

However  it  may  be  explained  on  a  matter  of  dis- 
cipline which  involved  that  of  doctrine,  S.  Paul  with- 
stood S.  Peter  to  the  face  and  said  "  he  was  to  be 
blamed."  The  ground  is  most  explicitly  stated,  be- 
cause he  was  not  walking  uprightly,  according  to 
the  truth  of  the  Gospel.  The  various  defences  made 
show  how  difficult  it  is  felt  to  reconcile  this  condem- 
nation with  Peter's  supposed  office  of  supreme  pastor 
and  doctor.  S.  Peter,  we  may  also  observe,  makes 
no  claim  to  any  personal  authority  as  the  teacher,  the 


THE   ROMAN   CLAIM  317 

centre  of  authority,  or  source  of  all  jurisdiction.  He 
was,  if  it  was  part  of  the  faith,  bound  to  do  this.  He 
cannot  be  excused  from  not  owning  it  under  plea  of 
humility  no  more  than  Christ  could  if  He  had  re- 
frained from  declaring  Himself  to  be  the  Son  of  God. 
His  failing  to  do  this  showed  that  he  did  know  him- 
self possessed  of  any  office  different  from  the  others. 
He  was  not  the  supreme  doctor  of  the  Church. 

Again,  S.  Peter  calls  himself  not  the  chief  of  the 
Apostles  but  a  fellow-elder.1  In  his  epistles,  unlike 
the  other  Apostles,  he  gives  no  disciplinary  instruc- 
tions. There  is  less  explicit  dogmatic  teaching  in 
them  than  in  the  epistles  of  S.  John.  He  nowhere 
asserts  himself  to  be  the  rock,  or  a  foundation  in 
any  sense  other  than  that  of  the  other  Apostles. 
He  nowhere  makes  the  claims  Rome  assigns  to  him. 
So  far  from  union  with  him  being  a  test  of  unity,  to 
say  "  I  am  of  Peter  "  is  the  sign  of  a  schismatical 
spirit.2  Those  were  condemned  who  said,  "  I  am  of 
Cephas."  It  was  a  mark  of  schism  to  adhere  thus 
specifically  to  Peter.  It  is  a  mark  of  schism  now. 

We  thus  find  the  prima  facie  witness  borne  against 
the  papal  claims  by  the  four  patriarchates  corrobora- 
ted by  the  Acts,  Epistles,  and  Revelation,  wherein  we 
find  the  Church  revealed  in  its  complete  and  estab- 
lished form. 

If  we  turn  to  the  accounts,  given  in  the  gospels,  of 
the  Church  in  its  preparatory  and  formative  stage,  we 
find  Peter  acting,  as  we  have  seen,  with  the  promi- 
nence of  a  leader,  but  with  no  such  office  assigned 
him  as  the  papal  claim  requires. 

1  i  Pet.  v.  i.  2  i  Cor.  i.  10-13. 


3i8          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

After  Peter  had  fallen  away,  and  by  denying 
Christ  had  forfeited  his  apostleship,  we  find  on  his 
repentance  our  Lord  restoring  him  to  it.  In  repara- 
tion for  his  former  boldness  and  threefold  denial, 
S.  Peter  makes  a  most  humble  and  threefold  pro- 
testation of  his  love  and  loyalty.  Our  Lord  asks 
him,  referring  to  his  former  hot  assertion  made  in 
his  own  strength,  "  Simon,  son  of  Jonas,  lovest  thou 
me?"  Peter  will  not  repeat  Christ's  word  and  say,  "  I 
love  Thee,"  but  humbly  says,  "  Yea,  Lord,  Thou 
knowest  I  have  an  affection  for  Thee."  Changing 
his  question,  Christ  finally  asks  him  if  he  has  an 
affection  for  Him.  The  broken  heart,  placing  no 
longer  reliance  in  itself,  Peter  replies,  "  Lord,  Thou 
knowest."  "  By  this  triple  confession  of  blessed 
Peter,"  says  S.  Cyril,  "  his  sin  consisting  of  a  triple 
denial  was  done  away,  and  by  the  words  of  our 
Lord,  '  Feed  my  sheep,'  a  renewal  of  the  apostleship 
bestowed  upon  him  is  understood  to  take  place." 

Thus  upon  this  lowly  acknowledgment  Christ  re- 
stores Peter  to  his  Apostleship  and  to  his  special 
office  in  it.  He  is  to  tend  the  sheep.  He  as  the 
foundation  layer  and  holder  of  the  keys  and  opener 
of  the  kingdom  is  to  shepherd  the  sheep.  He  is  to 
guide  the  sheep  of  the  old  dispensation  into  the 
new.  He  is  also  to  feed  them  and  the  new-born 
lambs  of  the  new  kingdom. 

There  is  nothing  herein  said  of  his  having  juris- 
diction over  any  of  the  other  shepherds  of  the  flock. 
Indeed,  it  is  explicitly  denied  that  he  has  any  authority 
pver  other  Apostles.  For  when  S.  Peter,  seeing 
S.  John  says,  "  What  shall  this  man  do?  "  Our  Lord 


THE   ROMAN   CLAIM  319 

says,  "What  is  that  to  thee?"  In  our  rough  Eng- 
lish, "That  is  no  affair  or  business  of  yours."  If  the 
other  Apostles  were  to  have  any  subordinate  relation 
to  Peter,  this  was  the  time  to  declare  it.  If  Peter 
was  to  be  the  inheritor  of  the  powers  of  the  collective 
Apostolate,  when  the  individual  members  of  it  had 
all  passed  away,  this  was  the  time  to  make  it  known. 
But  no,  any  superiority  is  not  merely  omitted,  it  is 
explicitly  declared  that  Peter  has  no  jurisdiction  over 
the  other  Apostles.  John's  person  and  work  are 
here  declared  to  be  entirely  independent  of  S.  Peter. 
He  had  nothing  to  do  with  them.  Nor  was  he  to  be 
an  inheritor  of  the  Apostolate  when  its  members  had 
passed  from  earth.  He  was  to  die,  so  Christ  fore- 
told, while  S.  John  might  tarry  till  Christ  came. 
The  meaning  of  our  Lord  is  plain.  The  Apostolate 
of  which  S.  John  was  a  part  was  to  continue,  but  the 
office  that  S.  Peter  held  would  pass  away  with  his 
death.  S.  Peter  could  have  no  successor  who  could 
have  jurisdiction  over  S.  John,  for  Peter  possessed 
none  himself;  and  so  too  no  jurisdiction  over  the 
episcopate  resting  on  S.  John's  foundation  or  that  of 
any  other  Apostle. 

Take  another  text,  alleged  as  giving  infallibility  to 
S.  Peter.  Our  Lord  said,  "  Simon,  Simon,  behold, 
Satan  hath  desired  to  have  you  (plural  and  so  signi- 
fying the  Apostles),  that  he  may  sift  you  as  wheat : 
but  I  have  prayed  for  thee  that  thy  faith  fail  not;  and 
when  thou  art  converted,  strengthen  thy  brethren." 
It  is  said  by  Roman  writers  that  here  "  Jesus  the 
Omnipotent  prays  absolutely  that  the  faith  of  one 
shall  be  unfailing.  Then  Simon's  faith  being  estab- 


320          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

lished,  he  is  commanded  to  strengthen  the  brethren 
in  the  faith  in  which  he  had  been  solidly  established. 
Jesus  first  renders  Simon's  faith  stable,  and  Simon  in 
turn  is  to  give  stability  to  the  faith  of  his  brethren." 
Over  against  this  we  will  quote  the  conclusion  of  the 
learned  authors  of  Janus.1  "  No  single  writer  to  the 
end  of  the  seventh  century  dreamt  of  such  an  in- 
terpretation; all  without  exception,  and  there  are 
eighteen  of  them,  explain  it  simply  as  a  prayer  of 
Christ  that  His  Apostle  might  not  wholly  succumb 
and  lose  his  faith  entirely  in  his  approaching  trial." 
The  true  exegesis  is,  that  Satan  desired  to  have  all, 
but  Christ  prays  for  Peter  as  being,  as  the  result 
shows,  in  the  most  danger.  We  may  assume  that 
Christ's  prayer  was  answered.  Now  Christ  prayed, 
not  that  Peter  should  not  deny  the  faith,  for  this  he 
did.  He  denied  the  faith  when  he  said  of  Him 
whom  he  had  confessed  to  be  the  Son  of  God,  "  I 
know  not  the  man  !  "  But  our  Lord  prayed  that  so 
denying  in  terms  the  faith,  Peter's  faith  in  Christ 
should  not  fail.  And  it  did  not.  At  Christ's  look 
he  was  converted  anew  and  more  thoroughly  than 
ever.  Having  passed  through  that  terrible  spiritual 
experience  of  fall  and  recovery,  by  divine  grace,  he 
could,  out  of  that  signal  experience  of  love  and  mercy, 
confirm  his  brethren.  Christ  had  forgiven  him  his 
greater  sin,  He  would  forgive  them  who  in  the  hour 
of  trial  fell  into  a  lesser  one  and  deserted  Him  and 
fled.  There  is  nothing  in  this  text  that  supports  the 
infallibility  of  Peter. 

We  have  then  only  the  text  in  S.  Matthew  to  con- 

1  Janus,  93. 


THE   ROMAN   CLAIM  321 

sider.  Roman  Catholics  are  so  brought  up  to  re- 
peat this  text  that  they  take  it  for  granted,  often 
without  examination,  that  it  favors  the  papal  claim. 
Let  us  consider  its  meaning.  "Jesus  asked  His  dis- 
ciples, saying,  Whom  say  ye  that  I  am?"  Simon 
Peter,  replying  for  them  said,  "  Thou  art  the  Christ, 
the  Son  of  the  Living  God."  "  Jesus  said,  Blessed  art 
thou,  Simon  Bar-jona;  for  flesh  and  blood  hath  not 
revealed  it  unto  thee,  but  my  Father  which  is  in 
heaven.  And  I  say  also  unto  thee,  That  thou  art 
Peter,  and  upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  Church ; 
and  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it. 
And  I  will  give  unto  thee  the  keys  of  the  Kingdom 
of  Heaven." 

We  have  seen  what  in  this  text  was  meant  by  the 
power  of  the  keys.  What  was  promised  to  Peter 
separately  and  representatively  was  subsequently 
given  to  all  collectively.  The  Apostolate  was  never 
to  pass  away,  for  Christ  said,  "  Lo,  I  am  with  you 
alway  unto  the  end  of  the  world."  It  was  also  to 
remain  as  held  in  joint  tenure  by  a  body.  Pressed 
by  the  difficulty  that  S.  John,  the  last  surviving 
Apostle,  could  not  have  been  subject  to  Linus,  who 
is  said  to  have  succeeded  S.  Peter  at  Rome,  the 
modern  Roman  theory  is,  that,  after  S.  John's  death, 
the  whole  Apostolate  survived  in  Peter.  The  theory, 
however  ingenious,  is  certainly  lacking  in  scriptural 
or  historical  proof.  According  to  Scripture,  the 
Apostolate  was  not  to  remain  surviving  in  Peter 
alone,  for  the  Church  was  to  be  forever  resting,  as 
S.  John  described  it,  on  its  twelve  foundations.  See- 
ing that  the  Apostolate  must  remain,  and  that  there 


322          CHRISTIAN  AND   CATHOLIC 

is  no  proof  it  does  so  in  Peter  alone  and  his  supposed 
successors,  it  is  clear  that  it  remains  in  the  episco- 
pate. By  it  our  Lord  fulfils  His  promise  to  be  with 
you,  a  collective  body,  until  the  world's  end.  S.  Peter, 
as  we  have  seen,  had  in  it  a  special  and  glorious 
office,  but  a  personal  one.  Of  the  Twelve  he  was 
the  first.  In  regard  to  the  Apostles,  he  was  a  leader, 
a  spokesman,  and  by  the  experience  of  his  own  re- 
covery, a  strengthener  of  their  faith.  In  regard  to  the 
Church  He  was  a  foundation  layer,  a  guide  to  the 
sheep  of  the  old  covenant,  a  feeder  of  the  sheep  and 
of  the  lambs  of  the  new  one.  But  the  keys,  while 
they  connote  stewardship  and  so  far  oversight,  do  not 
denote  superiority  over  other  stewards,  or  aught  that 
Rome  now  claims. 

It  remains,  then,  to  inquire  who  is  signified  by  the 
rock  on  which  the  Church  is  built.  As  the  text  says, 
it  is  built  upon  this  rock,  it  points  to  one  particular 
subject.  To  what  does  "this"  refer?  Is  it  to  Peter 
or  to  Christ,  confessed  by  Peter,  to  be  the  Son  of 
God? 

Some  of  the  reasons  why  it  does  not  refer  to  Peter 
are  these.  If  Peter  was  to  be  the  rock  our  Lord 
would  have  made  this  clear  by  saying,  "  Thou  art 
Peter,  the  rock  on  which  I  will  build  my  Church ;  " 
or,  "Thou  art  Peter  and  upon  thee  I  will  build  it." 
The  text  is  thus  sometimes  incorrectly  quoted.  It  is 
so  cited  in  sermons  that  it  has  become  a  common 
notion  with  the  Roman  laity  that  our  Lord  said  He 
would  build  His  Church  on  Peter,  or  that  Peter  was 
the  rock.  The  first  error,  then,  to  be  pointed  out,  is 
this  misquotation  or  misleading  use  of  the  text.  Our 


THE   ROMAN    CLAIM  323 

Lord  did  not  say,  "  Thou  art  Peter,  the  rock  on  which 
I  will  build  my  Church,"  but  said,  upon  this  rock 
I  will  build  my  Church.  The  test  of  the  correct 
meaning  is,  to  whom  does  "this"  refer?  Is  it  to 
Peter  or  to  Christ  who  was  revealed  to  and  confessed 
by  S.  Peter  to  be  the  son  of  God  ? 

Now  the  word  "  this  "  in  conversation  may  refer  to 
the  speaker,  as  when  our  Lord  says,  "  Destroy  this 
temple,"  meaning  Himself,  or  it  may  refer  to  a  third 
person.  "  But  it  is  doubtful  whether  any  passage 
can  be  cited  in  the  New  Testament  where  it  is  used 
to  denote  a  person  to  whom  the  person  using  it 
speaks."  *  Here  our  Lord  is  speaking  to  S.  Peter  and 
therefore  "  this  rock  "  cannot  refer  to  him. 

Again,  that  it  cannot  refer  to  S.  Peter  is  obvious 
from  the  fact  that  the  two  words,  "  Peter  "  and  "  rock," 
are  of  different  genders.  Peter,  being  a  man's  name 
is  in  the  masculine  gender,  while  rock  is  feminine. 
They  cannot,  therefore,  refer  to  the  same  thing. 

To  this  it  has  been  replied  that  our  Lord  spoke  in 
Syriac  or  Aramaic,  in  which  languages  this  distinction 
would  not  be  made.  But  other  and  as  learned 
scholars  have  thought  otherwise.  They  have  de- 
clared that  in  the  Syriac  "  Kepha,"  meaning  rock,  is 
feminine.  This  is  agreed  to  by  all.  But  the  word 
used  by  our  Lord  to  designate  a  man's  name,  either 
in  Syriac  or  Greek,  would  undoubtedly  be  masculine. 
We  find  our  Lord  doing  this  when  He  first  named 
the  Apostle,  saying  in  Syriac,  "Thou  shalt  be  called 
Cephas."'  He  thus  most  probably,  in  the  language 
He  used,  made  the  distinction  in  gender. 
1  Wordsworth,  Com.  S.  Matt.  xvi.  18. 


324         CHRISTIAN   AND  CATHOLIC 

But  be  this  as  it  may,  Greek  is  the  language  in 
which  God's  later  revelation  is  given  to  us,  and  we 
have  no  right  to  go  outside  of  it  If  Romans  can  do 
so  Protestants  can  do  the  same.  If  Romans  may 
assume  what  were  the  words  our  Lord  spoke  in 
Syriac,  of  which  we  have  no  record,  Protestants  may 
assume  His  accompanying  explanatory  actions.  If 
the  one  may  assume  that  He  used  the  same  gender 
in  both  clauses  of  the  sentence,  the  other  may  suppose 
that  by  laying  His  hand  on  Himself,  when  He 
said,  "  On  this  rock  I  will  build  my  Church,"  He 
explained  His  meaning.  We  must  leave  all  such 
suppositions  and  receive  the  text  as  preserved  in 
God's  Word.  If  our  Lord  did  speak  in  Syriac  or 
Aramaic,  we  must  nevertheless  accept  S.  Matthew's 
language  as  divinely  inspired  for  the  express  purpose 
of  marking  a  difference  which  the  Syriac  failed  to 
accentuate  or  suggest.  Romans  therefore  fail  in 
their  attempt  to  prove  that  "  this  rock "  refers  to 
Peter. 

If  the  Roman  interpretation  is  thus  seen  to  be  an 
impossible  one  because  ungrammatical,  it  is  also  un- 
scriptural.  It  is  an  admitted  rule  in  interpretation 
that  we  must  construe  Scripture  by  Scripture.  Now 
in  the  Holy  Scripture  the  word  rock  is  used  as  a 
synonym  of  God.  It  occurs  some  thirty-five  times 
in  the  Old  Testament.  We  will  quote  a  few  instances. 
"  The  God  of  Israel  said,  the  Rock  of  Israel  spake  to 
me."1  "The  Lord  is  my  rock,  and  who  is  a  rock 
save  our  God."2  "There  is  none  holy  as  the  Lord: 
neither  is  there  any  rock  like  our  God."8  "  Is  there 

1  2  Sam.  xxiii.  3.  a  2  Sam.  xxii.  2,  32.  8  i  Sam.  ii.  2. 


THE   ROMAN   CLAIM  325 

a  God  beside  me?  yea,  no  Rock,  I  know  not  any."1 
"  The  Lord  Jehovah  is  the  Rock  of  ages."  2  Seeing 
that  rock  was  a  familiar  title  for  God,  and  the  con- 
fession made  being  that  Christ  was  the  Son  of  God, 
upon  our  Lord's  saying,  "  Upon  this  rock  I  will  build 
my  Church,"  the  Apostles  would  naturally  have 
understood  the  word  rock  as  referring  to  Himself. 
Christ  takes  that  title  to  Himself  when  He  counsels 
the  wise  man  to  build  his  house  upon  the  rock  that 
the  winds  and  waves  cannot  overcome.  He  claims 
to  be  the  Son  of  God,  the  Rock  of  ages.  The  Roman 
exegesis  again  fails  as  being  an  unscriptural  one. 

Again,  the  words  "  Peter  "  and  "  rock  "  have  dif- 
ferent significations,  and  therefore  cannot  mean  the 
same  thing,  and  so  we  have  another  proof  that  Peter 
is  not  to  be  identified  'with  the  rock  on  which  the 
Church  is  founded.  The  difference  is  seen  in  the 
titles  given  to  our  Lord.  As  the  Son  of  God  He  is 
the  rock ;  as  Son  of  Man  He  is  the  stone.  He  was 
the  divine  rock  that  followed  Israel,  and  "  that  Rock 
was  Christ."  He  was  as  the  Son  of  Man  the  Virgin 
born,  "  the  Stone  cut  out  without  hands."  His  divinity 
was  a  rock  of  offence,  His  humanity  a  stone  of  stum- 
bling. Now  Cephas  is,  we  read,  by  interpretation, 
stone.  It  is,  if  we  look  at  the  Revised  Version,  not 
necessarily  a  stone.  The  word  signifies  a  kind  or 
quality  of  material.  Applied  to  the  person  of  Peter 
it  was  to  mark  his  spiritual  transformation.  By 
nature  he  was  Simon,  unstable  and  weak,  by  union 
with  the  Living  Rock  he  became  rocklike  or  petri- 
fied. Thus  in  contrast  with  the  term  "  rock "  in 

1  Isa.  xliv.  8,  marg.  -  Isa.  xxvi.  4,  marg. 


326          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

Scripture  the  word  "  stone "  marks  a  difference  not 
only  of  size  but  of  quality  of  material.  The  "  rock  " 
denotes  something  or  some  one  who  is  divine ;  "Peter" 
or  "  stone,"  something  of  like  nature  with  the  rock, 
but  belonging  to  humanity.  Consequently  "  Peter" 
and  "this  rock"  are  two  different  things,  and  the 
Church  is  not  said  to  be  founded  on  Peter,  a  man, 
but  on  Christ,  the  Son  of  God. 

Besides  this,  there  are  convincing  theological 
reasons  why  Peter  cannot  be  the  rock.  The  Catholic 
faith  is  that  the  Church  is  built  on  the  foundation  of 
all  the  Apostles.  The  Roman  view  is,  that  eleven  of 
these  having  passed,  i.  e.,  crumbled  away,  the  Church 
now  rests  upon  the  successor  of  one.  The  heavenly 
city  is  thus  more  like  an  inverted  pyramid,  resting  on 
its  apex,  than  rising  four  square  on  its  twelve  foun- 
dations. This  is  contrary  to  the  whole  teaching  of 
Holy  Scripture,  as  set  forth  in  type,  prophecy,  and 
revelation.  There  were  the  twelve  patriarchs,  the 
twelve  tribes,  the  twelve  stones  on  the  high  priest's 
breastplate,  the  twelve  Apostles,  the  twelve  sides  and 
corner-stones  and  twelve  gates  of  the  celestial  city. 
The  Church  is  not  an  inverted  pyramid,  but  has 
twelve  living  foundations  at  its  base. 

Another  objection  is  this :  Christ  said,  Upon  this 
rock  will  I  build  my  Church  and  the  gates  of  hell, 
/.  e.,  hades,  shall  not  prevail  against  it.  The  rock 
signified  must  therefore  be  one  that  the  gates  of  hell 
cannot  overcome.  Now  "  hades  "  means  the  powers 
of  sin,  Satan,  and  death.  But  it  is  obvious  sin  and 
Satan  did  prevail  over  Peter,  and  led  him,  though 
afterwards  he  recovered,  to  deny  Christ.  And  in  due 


THE   ROMAN   CLAIM  327 

course  he  passed  under  the  power  of  death.  And  if 
the  temporal  power  is  as  claimed  essential  to  the 
papacy,  then  the  gates  of  hell  have  prevailed  against 
it.  Against  Christ,  however,  sin  and  Satan  had  no 
power,  and  death  had  no  dominion  over  Him.  He 
rose  triumphantly  with  the  keys  of  hell  and  of  death 
in  His  hands.  The  interpretation  that  makes  Peter 
the  rock  is  thus  seen  to  be  untheological.  Because' 
only  one  who  is  in  Himself  the  resurrection  and  life 
can  be  the  foundation  of  a  church  against  which 
death  cannot  prevail.  Again,  it  has  been  argued  by 
Romans  that  as  a  rock  is  something  permanent,  and 
the  rock  on  which  the  Church  is  built  must  be  as 
enduring  as  the  Church  itself,  therefore  this  promise 
which  they  claim  was  made  to  Peter  is  also  a  promise 
that  he  would  have  successors.  But  as  the  Church 
is  to  last  for  all  eternity  and  the  papacy  cannot 
possibly  last  beyond  the  end  of  the  world,  it  follows 
that  the  rock  cannot  be  Peter  and  his  successors. 

The  limitations  of  this  book  do  not  allow  of  citation 
from  the  fathers  as  to  the  meaning  of  this  text.  But 
a  great  deal  of  needless  search  will  be  saved  if  the 
legal  rule  is  remembered  that  counts  of  little  or  no 
value  " obiter  dicta"  We  should  confine  our  inves- 
tigations to  what  the  fathers  said  when  they  were 
engaged  in  writing  an  explanation  of  the  text.  All 
these  have  been  tabulated.1  The  result  is  that  the 
preponderance  of  authorities  hold  the  view  that  Christ, 
or  the  confession  of  Peter  of  His  divinity,  is  the  rock. 
And  while  there  are  some  who  state  that  here  an 
authority  or  office  was  given  to  Peter,  there  are  none 
i  See  "  Petrine  Claims."  S.  P.  C.  K. 


328          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

who  hold  it  was  one  which  was  to  be  transmitted  to 
a  successor.  The  writers  of  Janus,  who  were  Roman 
theologians,  wrote,  as  the  result  of  their  long  and 
f  learned  investigation  :  "  Of  all  the  fathers  who  inter- 
'  pret  these  passages  in  the  Gospels,1  not  a  single  one 
applies  them  to  the  Roman  bishops  as  Peter's  suc- 
cessors." "  Not  one  has  dropped  the  faintest  hint 
that  the  primacy  of  Rome  is  the  consequence  of  the 
commission  and  promise  to  Peter.  Not  one  has  ex- 
plained the  rock  on  which  Christ  would  build  His 
Church  as  the  office  given  to  Peter  to  be  transmitted 
to  his  successors.  But  they  understood  by  it,  either 
Christ  Himself,  or  Peter's  confession  of  faith  in  Christ, 
or  else  that  Peter  was  the  foundation  equally  with  the 
others." 

Launoy,2  a  Roman  divine,  made  an  exhaustive  col- 
lection from  the  fathers,  church  writers,  and  councils 
showing  their  various  interpretations  of  the  text  we 
have  been  considering.  Out  of  about  eighty-five 
citations  sixty  authorities  take  the  rock  to  be  Christ 
or  the  confession  of  His  divinity ;  only  seventeen  see 
in  the  rock  any  reference  to  S.  Peter  "  and  these  say 
nothing  in  this  connection  of  his  successor."  8 

Concerning  the  papal  infallibility  a  Roman  au- 
thority says,  "  It  would,  of  course,  be  a  monstrous 
anachronism  were  we  to  attribute  a  belief  in  papal 
infallibility  to  ante-Nicene  fathers ;  "  4  and  as  concern- 
ing the  papal  claim  to  a  supremacy  of  jurisdiction, 
the  Roman  Bossuet,  the  great  French  theologian, 

1  S.  Matt.  xvi.  18;  S.  John  xxi.  17. 

2  Launoy,  Opera,  torn.  5,  par.  2,  Ep.  vii. 
8  Peoples,  "  Roman  Claims,"  p.  8. 

*  Addis  and  Arnold,  "  Catholic  Dictionary,"  Art.  Pope. 


THE   ROMAN   CLAIM  329 

declared  that  the  "  very  late  invention  that  bishops 
receive  their  jurisdiction  from  the  pope,  and  are,  as 
it  were  his  vicars,  ought  to  be  banished  from  Christian 
schools,  as  unheard  of  for  twelve  centuries."  1 

As  Catholics,  therefore,  directed  by  our  Anglican  au- 
thorities to  interpret  Holy  Scripture  according  to  the 
fathers,  and  as  the  Romans  also  are  directed  by  Trent 
so  to  receive  the  Holy  Scriptures,  we  cannot  allow  that 
the  present  claim  of  Rome  is  part  of  the  Christian 
religion,  or  an  accredited  dogma  of  the  Catholic  faith. 

1  Defensio  Chri.  Gallicani,  Bk.  viii.  c.  xiv. 

NOTE.  See  page  311. 

In  every  Christian  there  are  two  spirits  that  guide  him,  the  human 
spirit  and  the  divine  spirit.  So  it  is  with  the  Church.  The  develop- 
ment theory  may  account  for  the  rise  of  the  Papacy,  but  not  necessa- 
rily for  its  divine  authorship.  If  divine,  its  methods  will  be  divine, 
its  end  divine,  its  result  divine.  The  methods  by  which  the  Papacy 
were  developed  were  human,  among  them  forgeries  and  fraud.  Now 
God  has  no  need  of  men's  lies  to  carry  out  His  purposes ;  and  where 
frauds  are  used,  the  action  is  not  divine. 

The  end  reached  by  the  development  was  that  of  an  absolute  mon- 
archy. The  Pope  claimed  universal  jurisdiction,  sole  legislative  power, 
superiority  to  General  Councils,  a  personal  infallibility,  and  to  be  the 
supreme  arbiter  of  doctrine  and  morals,  the  Vicar  of  Christ.  He  also 
claimed  power  of  deposing  all  sovereigns,  and  absolving  subjects  from 
allegiance  to  their  lawful  kings.  He  also  claimed  to  be  a  temporal  and 
earthly  king,  surrounded  by  all  the  powers  and  court  of  an  earthly  mon- 
arch, and  this  is  claimed  as  an  essential  part  of  the  Papacy.  It  is  some- 
thing entirely  different  in  character  from  the  Papacy  of  the  early  ages, 
which  was  one  of  precedency  and  honor. 

This  is  not  such  a  kingdom  as  Christ  founded.  The  monarchical 
character  of  the  Papacy  shows  it  to  be  the  outcome  of  the  human 
spirit.  Moreover,  the  result  of  the  establishment  of  the  Papacy  has 
been  to  divide  Christendom.  It  cannot  therefore  have  been  the  out- 
come of  the  divine  spirit.  It  is  of  human  growth  and  development, 
not  the  work  of  God.  As  God  bore  both  with  Israel  and  Judah, 
though  the  choice  of  a  visible  head  was  a  sign  of  rebellion,  so  God 
may  have  carried  on  His  work  of  saving  souls  in  spite  of  the  Papacy. 
It  has  been,  however,  instead  of  a  principle  of  unity,  a  great  cause  of 
division. 


CHAPTER   XVIII 
THE   HOLY  SEE 

IT  is  a  habit  with  some  to  speak  of  the  see  of  Rome 
as  the  "  Holy  See."  It  is  part  of  the  effort  to 
present  Rome  in  an  attractive  light  and  to  create  a 
desire  for  union  with  her. 

As  Catholics  all  that  is  Catholic,  in  Rome  or  else- 
where, we  love.  In  many  ways,  her  people,  by  their 
faith  and  zeal,  set  us  an  inspiring  example.  We  feel 
that  a  church  that  so  realizes  the  unseen  world  and 
is  so  filled  with  such  devotion  must,  on  these  accounts, 
be  dear  to  Christ.  We  have  no  desire,  especially 
when  all  Christians  should  be  drawing  together,  to 
say  aught  against  the  Catholicity  she  embodies. 
Whatever  we  do  say,  it  is  with  the  consciousness  and 
willing  acknowledgment  of  our  own  shortcomings. 
Not  then  in  disparagement  of  what  is  Catholic  in  our 
sister  Church,  but  writing  for  our  own  people,  let  us 
examine  Rome's  claim  to  the  title  of  "  The  Holy 
See." 

Holiness  is  one  of  the  marks  of  the  Catholic 
Church.  She  is  holy  because  the  Holy  Spirit  dwells 
within  her.  Holy  because  she  possesses  in  her 
sacraments  the  means  of  developing  holiness.  Holy 
because  she  has  in  her  saints  the  highest  ideals  of 
holiness,  and  in  every  age  is  producing  them.  If  the 
special  holiness  claimed  for  the  Roman  see  is  like 


THE   HOLY   SEE  331 

that  of  the  Church,  it  will  possess  it  in  like  manner 
as  a  distinctive  and  permanent  feature.  Persons  will 
doubtless  decide  this  question  as  they  do  similar  ones, 
governed  largely  by  their  religious  presuppositions. 
But  admitting  Newman's  argument  that  where  there 
is  the  most  grace,  there  through  its  rejection  we  shall 
find  the  worst  sin ;  where,  in  other  words,  there  is 
the  most  light,  there  are  the  strongest  shadows,  yet 
must  we  not  shut  our  eyes  to  a  good  deal  of  history 
to  find  in  the  Roman  see  any  special  marks  of  sanc- 
tity? For  must  it  not  surpass  all  others  in  holiness 
to  make  good  its  claim  to  be  pre-eminently  "  The 
Holy  See,"  and  can  any  unprejudiced  historian  say 
that  it  does  so? 

Let  us  then  consider  together  some  of  its  notable 
features.  One  feature  of  it  is  that,  to  a  degree  unlike 
any  other  see  in  Christendom,  it  has  the  reputation 
of  being  connected  with  a  long  series  of  forgeries.  It 
was  the  oft-repeated  reproach  of  the  Greeks  that  the 
Roman  Church  was  "  the  native  home  of  inventions 
and  falsification  of  documents."  Historians  have 
often  in  the  pursuance  of  their  duty  brought  them 
before  the  public.  The  authors  of  "  The  Pope  and 
the  Council,"  who  were  trained  Roman  theologians, 
give  some  fifty  pages  to  an  account  of  them.  "  Like," 
they  say,  "  successive  strata  of  the  earth  covering  one 
another,  so  layer  after  layer  of  forgeries  and  falsifica- 
tions was  piled  up  in  the  Church." 

We  will  cite  from  the  above-mentioned  work  some 
few  examples. 

First,  we  find  it  inserted  in  the  Roman  manuscript 
of  the  sixth  Nicene  canon  that  "  the  Roman  Church 


332         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

always  had  the  primacy,"  a  fraud  which  was  exposed 
at  the  council  of  Chalcedon.  Next,  in  the  fathers, 
S.  Augustine  had  said  that  all  those  writings  of  the 
Bible  were  pre-eminently  attested  which  the  Apos- 
tolical Churches  had  received.  This  passage  was 
corrupted  to  signify  that  those  epistles  belong  to 
canonical  writings  which  the  holy  see  has  issued. 
This  was  to  put  the  decretal  letters  of  the  popes  on 
a  par  with  Scripture.  Again,  in  proof  of  the  alleged 
holiness  of  the  popes,  the  fable  was  invented  "  that 
of  the  thirty  popes  before  Constantine,  all  but  one 
were  martyrs."  Finding  it  difficult  to  explain  the 
apostasy  of  Pope  Liberius,  the  story  was  credited  that 
Liberius,  when  exiled,  had  ordained  Felix  as  his  suc- 
cessor, and  then  abdicated,  so  that  his  subsequent 
apostasy  did  not  matter.  In  order  to  increase  the 
papal  power,  two  spurious  epistles  of  Pope  Julius 
were  forged,  to  the  effect  that  the  Apostles  and 
Nicene  Council  had  said  no  council  could  be  held 
without  the  pope's  injunction.  "  In  the  fifth  and 
beginning  of  the  sixth  century  began  the  compilation 
of  spurious  acts  of  Roman  martyrs  which  modern 
criticism,  even  at  Rome,  has  been  obliged  to  give  up." 
In  the  middle  of  the  ninth  century  arose  that  huge 
fabrication  now  known  as  the  forged  decretals.  It 
was  a  compilation  of  about  a  hundred  pretended 
decrees  of  the  earliest  popes,  together  with  other 
spurious  writings.  Those  documents  Pope  Nicholas  I. 
(858),  a  man  of  great  audacity,  assured  the  Prankish 
bishops  had  long  been  preserved  in  the  archives  of 
the  Roman  Church. 

"  But  the  most  potent  instrument  in  the  new  papal 


THE   HOLY  SEE  333 

system  was  Gratian's  Decretum"  Gratian  was  a  great 
jurist  about  the  middle  of  the  twelfth  century,  whose 
work  on  canon  law  displaced  all  others.  "  No  book 
has  ever  come  near  it  in  its  influence  in  the  Church, 
although  there  is  scarcely  another  so  full  of  gross 
errors."  All  these  fictions,  ignorantly  it  may  be,  he 
inserted  into  his  code.  How  the  Western  Church 
unsuspectingly  received  the  accumulated  forgeries, 
how  they  gradually  became  adopted,  how  the  great 
theologians  like  Thomas  Aquinas  and  Melchior  Cano 
built  their  theories  of  the  papacy  upon  them,  how 
Popes  Hildebrand  and  Innocent  III.  used  them  to 
build  up  the  present  colossal  papal  system,  is  a  matter 
of  ordinary  history.  Thus  the  whole  structure  of  the 
Church  was  changed  from  the  ancient  canonical  pri- 
macy to  the  modern  monarchical  supremacy.  The 
forged  decretals  did  not,  as  Roman  advocates  have 
claimed  in  extenuation,  give  utterance  to  the  Church's 
ancient  tradition.  The  modern  monarchical  papacy 
was  not  contained  in  the  original  constitution  of  the 
Church  as  Christ  made  it.  It  could  not  come,  as  the 
three  orders  came,  by  way  of  a  providential  ordering. 
It  was  not  a  legitimate  development,  but  a  revolution. 
"  The  forged  decretals  completely  revolutionized 
(Janus,  97)  the  whole  constitution  of  the  Church.  On 
that  point  there  can  be  no  controversy  among  candid 
historians."  To  do  this  use  was  made,  not  of  exist- 
ing authenticated  traditions,  but  of  previously  existing 
forgeries.  A  black  stream  of  fraud  and  ambition  had 
already  contaminated  the  see,  influential  through  its 
wealth  and  boastful  of  its  origin.  Developments  of 
a  legitimate  kind  there  must  be  in  God's  Church, 


334          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

in  its  government  as  established  by  canons  and,  as 
she  guards  by  definition,  the  faith  once  received.  But 
God  has  no  need,  as  Pere  Gratry  said,  of  man's  lies, 
to  further  His  purposes.  Whatever  development  is 
formed  thereby  has  on  it  a  brand  that  denotes  an  evil 
origin  and  is  not  a  development  ordained  of  God. 

Gradually,  built  upon  this  foundation  of  falsehood, 
the  papacy  developed  into  its  portentous  proportions. 
It  was  not  until  after  a  thousand  years  had  passed 
that  the  bishop  of  Rome  came  to  be  called  officially 
as  he  is  now  the  vicar  of  Christ.  His  power  under 
Hildebrand  and  Innocent  III.  became  so  magnified 
that  he  could  take  away  kingdoms  and  absolve  sub- 
jects from  their  allegiance.  In  the  exercise  of  this 
power,  untold  miseries  were  inflicted  upon  innocent 
people,  and  nations  were  deluged  with  blood.  As 
the  final  outcome,  in  1870  the  pope  was  declared, 
when  speaking  ex  cathedra,  to  be  officially  in  posses- 
sion of  the  assisting  aid  of  infallibility.  German 
Roman  theologians  of  high  repute  declared  this  was 
not  the  original  Catholic  faith,  and  revolted.  Ameri 
can  Roman  Catholics  to-day  are  imposed  upon  by 
being  told  that  this  infallibility  is  like  that  of  the 
supreme  court.  But  the  supreme  court,  when  it 
finds  it  has  fallen  into  error,  can  and  does  reverse  its 
decisions.  The  pope,  if  infallible,  cannot  do  so. 
The  decree  of  infallibility  distinctly  states  that  the 
papal  decisions  are  irreformable.  So  in  one  form  or 
another,  the  deceit  goes  on,  — sometimes  by  conceal- 
ment of  former  teachings,  made,  for  instance,  in 
Roman  catechism,  sometimes  by  audacious  assertion. 
For  now  three  centuries  the  forgeries  of  these  decre- 


THE   HOLY   SEE  335 

tals  have  been  exposed.  Rome,  beaten  in  the  con- 
troversy over  their  genuineness,  has  acknowledged 
them  to  be  fabrications.  Popes  as  well  as  Roman 
theologians  have  admitted  them  to  be  forgeries.  Yet 
like  an  arch  from  which  the  wooden  constructive 
skeleton  has  been  removed,  the  papacy,  built  on  this 
framework  of  lies,  remains.  The  same  phenomenon 
is  to  be  found  in  Mormonism  and  other  false  religious 
systems.  The  papacy  remains  strong  as  a  consoli- 
dated monarchical  organization,  but  to  the  candid  and 
discerning,  with  the  fatal  telltale  marks  of  its  origin 
upon  it.  It  is  not  a  holy  see. 

Again,  where  shall  we  look  for  special  marks  of 
holiness,  if  it  exists  in  the  see,  save  in  the  pontiffs 
themselves?  So  strongly  has  this  been  felt,  that  a 
papal  secretary  once  wrote :  "  Popes  must  be  held 
to  inherit  innocence  and  sanctity  from  Peter." 
Gregory  VII.  made  the  holiness  of  the  popes  the 
foundation  of  his  claims  to  universal  dominion. 
"  Every  sovereign,"  he  said,  "  however  good  before, 
becomes  corrupted  by  the  use  of  power,  whereas 
every  rightly  appointed  pope  becomes  a  saint, 
through  the  imputed  merits  of  Peter."  In  our  time 
the  papacy  has  been  filled  by  two  popes  of  recog- 
nized Christian  character.  They  were  not  free  from 
faults,  but  no  such  squibs  were  put  on  Pasquino, 
Rome's  jibing  pillar,  at  their  death,  as  on  their  pre- 
decessor's, Pope  Gregory  XVI.  He  was  represented 
as  offering  to  S.  Peter  a  very  large  key,  so  large 
indeed  that  it  did  not  fit  the  heavenly  gate.  He 
had  to  explain  to  the  heavenly  warden  that  by  mis- 
take he  had  brought  the  key  to  his  capacious  wine 


336         CHRISTIAN  AND  CATHOLIC 

cellar !  We  gladly  record  the  fact  that  not  only  the 
two  late,  but  many  popes,  have  been  sincere  followers 
of  Jesus  Christ.  But  can  we  say,  on  examining  the 
history  of  the  see,  that  it  bears  out  the  boast  of 
special  sanctity?  Rather  are  we  not  obliged  to  say 
that  no  other  see  has  been  filled  with  so  many  and 
such  notoriously  evil  and  bad  men? 

"  For  above  sixty  years,"  writes  Janus,  "  from  883 
to  955,  the  Roman  Church  was  enslaved  and  degraded 
while  the  Apostolic  see  became  a  prey  and  plaything 
of  rival  factions  of  nobles,  and  for  a  long  time  of 
ambitious  and  profligate  women."  "  During  the  pa- 
pacy of  Sergius,"  says  Dean  Milman,1  "  rose  into 
power  the  infamous  Theodora,  with  her  daughters 
Mazoria  and  Theodora,  the  prostitutes  who,  in  the 
strong  language  of  historians,  disposed  for  many 
years  of  the  papal  tiara,  and  not  content  with  dis- 
gracing by  their  own  licentious  lives  the  chief  city  of 
Christendom,  actually  placed  their  profligate  para- 
mours or  base-born  sons  in  the  chair  of  Peter."  The 
well-known  licentious  life  of  Cardinal  Borgia  did  not 
hinder  the  electors  from  choosing  him  to  fill  S.  Peter's 
chair.  He  made  one  of  his  natural  sons,  Caesar 
Borgia,  a  cardinal,  —  and  the  brother  of  his  mistress 
Guilia,  Alexandro  Farnese,  another.  Dr.  Creighton 
in  his  work  on  the  papacy  felt  himself  obliged  to 
credit  the  scandalous  story  that  Cardinal  Caesar 
Borgia  gave  a  supper  in  Rome  to  fifty  prostitutes. 
Though  conspicuous  for  his  evil  living,  Alexander  VI. 
does  not  stand  alone.  "  The  secularized  papacy  a 

1  "Latin  Christianity,"  vol.  iii.  p.  158. 

2  Creighton,  vol.  iv.  p.  441. 


THE   HOLY  SEE  337 

can  excite  nothing  but  disgust,  but  the  seculariza- 
tion of  the  papacy  was  begun  by  Sixtus  IV.,  was  pro- 
found under  Innocent  VIII.  as  under  Alexander  VI., 
and  was  not  much  mended  under  Julius  II.  and 
Leo  X."  "  Nearly  all  the  line  of  pontiffs,4  Nicho- 
las V.  (1447),  Calixtus  III.  (1455),  Pius  H.  or  ^Eneas 
Sylvius  (1458),  Paul  II.  (1464),  Sixtus  IV.  (1471), 
Innocent  VIII.  (1484),  Alexander  VI.  (1492), 
Pius  III.  (1503),  Julius  II.  (1503),  and  Leo  X. 
(1513),  betrayed  increasing  love  of  pomp  and  worldly 
pleasures.  Nepotism  was  the  prevailing  motive  in 
their  distribution  of  preferment;  too  many  played 
a  leading  part  in  base  political  intrigues.  Nor  may 
we  pass  in  silence  the  appalling  profligacy  which  so 
often  stained  the  reputation  of  the  later  pontiffs." 
Cardinal  Baronius,  in  his  history,  admitting  the  terri- 
ble degradation  of  the  papacy  in  the  tenth  century, 
could  only  wonder  how  the  Church  was  preserved. 
As  we  look  at  the  see's  stained  record  in  her  pontiffs, 
we  cannot,  in  historical  justice,  award  it  the  title  of 
"  The  Holy  See." 

Again,  we  ask  what  has  been  the  spirit  of  the 
Roman  see?  Has  it  not  been  marked  from  the  early 
times  with  that  of  worldly  ambition,  thirst  for  power, 
and  political  intrigues?  Have  there  not  been  popes 
and  rival  popes  who  have  hated  and  excommunicated 
one  another,  and  Christendom  been  so  disorganized 
by  their  strife  that  Christians  had  no  sure  means  of 
knowing  who  the  right  pope  was?  Has  the  papacy, 
as  Peter  was  bidden  to  do,  put  up  the  sword  into  its 
sheath,  or  has  it  not  constantly  appealed  to  the  arm 

1  "  Hardwick's  Hist.,"  p.  364. 

23 


338         CHRISTIAN  AND   CATHOLIC 

of  flesh  to  accomplish  its  designs?  Has  not  the 
papacy  intrigued  to  the  setting  of  nobles  against 
kings,  and  kings  against  emperors,  and  when  baffled, 
called  on  the  sultan's  aid?  Has  it  not  in  politics 
been  in  alliance  with  all  parties  as  best  served  its  own 
ends?  When  the  struggle  for  freedom  was  going  on 
in  England,  was  not  the  pope  on  the  side  of  King 
John,  not  with  the  barons?  To-day,  having  dis- 
covered that  in  our  Republic  his  power  and  revenues 
are  greater  than  under  a  monarchy,  the  pope  poses 
as  a  friend  of  republicanism.  But  has  the  papacy 
as  a  rule  been  on  the  side  of  progress,  education,  and 
free  government?  The  late  pope  put  forth  an  admir- 
able bull  on  the  relation  of  capital  and  labor.  There 
are  liberal  Roman  ecclesiastics  in  America.  But  what 
about  the  papal  government  in  Rome  when  it  had  the 
power?  And  has  there  not  been  found  in  Rome  a 
greed  for  a  world-wide  rule  which  made  the  papacy 
in  mediaeval  times  a  revived  Caesarism?  Has  not 
Rome  claimed  that  Peter's  two  swords  signified  that 
she  was  the  head  of  all  temporal  and  spiritual  power 
on  earth?  Has  she  not  exercised  this  authority  and 
laid  kingdoms  under  interdict,  and  for  hostility  to 
herself  excommunicated  kings.  One  may  possibly 
condone  Hildebrand  believing  in  the  forged  decretals, 
in  his  struggle  for  the  Church's  spiritual  rights,  but 
the  struggle  of  his  successor,  Innocent  III.,  aiming  at 
increased  temporal  sovereignty,  was  something  very 
different.  "The  whole  significance  of  the  papacy," 
says  Dr.  Creighton,1  "  was  altered  when  this  desire 
to  secure  a  temporal  sovereignty  became  a  leading 

1  Creighton,  "  The  Papacy,"  vol.  i.  p.  22. 


THE    HOLY   SEE  339 

feature  of  the  papal  policy."  "  The  great  interests 
of  Christendom  were  forgotten  in  the  struggle." 
"  The  moral  prestige  of  the  papacy  was  irrevocably 
lowered."  This  representative  of  the  Lord  of  Peace, 
in  his  greed  for  dominion,  has  been  the  inciter  of 
innumerable  wars  and  a  sea  of  blood  flows  round  the 
papal  throne.  It  is  not  in  anger,  but  in  intense  sorrow 
we  are  forced  to  admit  this.  We  must  not  allow  our- 
selves to  be  hypnotized  into  believing  Rome  to  be 
"the  holy  see." 

Nor  has  this  unholy  spirit  for  worldly  aggrandize- 
ment abated.  Not  that  it  now  aims  at  feudal  as- 
cendency, but  still  it  determinedly  claims  a  temporal 
sovereignty.  For  years  the  Italians  had  grievously 
suffered  under  the  brutality  of  the  ecclesiastical 
papal  government.  It  was  one  of  the  worst  of 
governments  of  nations  called  civilized.  The  press 
was  under  inquisitorial  supervision,  and  a  daily  paper 
did  not  exist  in  Rome  till  1846.  Free  speech  was 
not  tolerated.  Education  was  in  the  hands  of  priests 
who  thought  an  ignorant  people  were  the  easiest 
governed.  In  many  parishes  there  were  no  schools  at 
all.  Robberies  and  brigandism  abounded.1  "  Agri- 
culture was  at  a  standstill.  Industrial  enterprises  were 
hindered  by  heavy  taxes,  and  clerical  interference. 
Poverty,  pauperism,  and  beggary  abounded.  Justice 
was  shamefully  administered.  Persons  were  liable  to 
arrest  without  warrant.  The  judges  were  ecclesias- 
tics, corrupt  and  incapable."  "  It  is  not,"  said  Mr. 
Gladstone,  "  mere  imperfection,  not  occasional  sever- 
ity ;  it  is  incessant,  systematic  violation  of  law  by  the 

1  Robertson's  Church  in  Italy. 


340          CHRISTIAN   AND    CATHOLIC 

power  appointed  to  watch  over  it."  In  1870  those 
who  entered  the  dungeons  of  the  inquisition  found  all 
kinds  of  instruments  of  torture.1  When  in  1859  a 
rising  took  place  at  Perugia,  the  pope's  foreign 
soldiers  put  it  down,  looting  houses,  massacring  old 
and  young.  Pope  Pius  IX.  personally  thanked  the 
general  and  had  a  medal  struck  in  memory  of  the 
event.  Can  any  true-hearted  American  wonder  that 
the  Italians  were  against  such  a  government,  or  fail 
to  sympathize  with  them  in  their  struggle  for  liberty? 
A  constitutional  government  united  Italy  under 
Victor  Emmanuel,  and  gave  to  the  Italians  the  blessing 
of  freedom  and  legislative  government.  This  govern- 
ment, with  great  liberality,  secured  by  its  laws  the 
papacy  in  the  free  exercise  of  its  spiritual  powers. 
By  the  articles  called  the  "  Papal  Guarantees,"  the 
person  of  the  pope  is  held  to  be  sacred  and  inviol- 
able. The  free  action  of  the  cardinals  is  secured  in 
their  election  of  a  pope.  No  agent  of  police  or 
government  official  can  enter  the  residence  of  the 
pontiff.  He  can  have  a  post-office  of  his  own,  under 
his  control,  and  letters  to  and  from  the  pope  are  free 
from  tax.  Ambassadors  to  him  are  accorded  the 
prerogatives  belonging  to  them.  To  him  the  Italian 
Government  renders  sovereign  honors  and  sets  aside 
$750,000  yearly  for  his  use.  It  is  therefore  grossly 
misleading  to  say  that  the  pope  is  oppressed.  He  is 
perfectly  free  to  exercise  all  his  spiritual  functions 
and  powers.  The  free  election  of  the  present  pope 
is  a  testimony  of  this.  But  he  still  poses  for  sym- 
pathy as  a  prisoner  and  begs  for  Peter's  pence.  It  is 

1  Robertson,  25. 


THE    HOLY   SEE  341 

unnecessary  for  Americans  to  contribute  to  his  sup- 
port when  he  can  have  so  ample  an  income.  It  is 
untrue  that  his  spirituality  needs  for  its  protection  a 
temporal  sovereignty.  Yet  to  gain  this  and  bring 
Italy  back  into  its  old  state  of  political  degradation 
is  the  constant  effort  of  the  papacy.  It  is  not  Chris- 
tianity, but  its  antithesis.  It  is  not  a  "  holy  see." 

We  might  dwell  upon  many  other  like  features  of 
the  papacy.  Catholicity  is  of  Christ,  the  papacy  is 
of  man.  And  to  the  spiritual-minded  its  distinguish- 
ing evil  note  is  worldliness.  Roman  Catholicism  is 
full  of  contrivances,  by  appeals  to  fear  for  the  ac- 
quisition of  wealth.  The  Roman  Church  is  powerful 
as  a  great  money-getting  machine,  and  the  pope  lives 
surrounded  by  the  etiquette  of  an  earthly  court.  Rome 
well  knows  how  to  make  her  performances  attractive 
and  spectacular.  The  state  and  splendor  of  her  mag- 
nificent processions,  with  the  pope  borne  in  regal 
state,  surrounded  by  her  cortege  of  richly  vested 
cardinals,  escorted  by  her  Swiss  and  noble  guards, 
with  glittering  armor  and  drawn  swords,  with  ten 
thousands  of  excited  people  shouting  frantically  for 
their  "  Papa  Re,"  make  a  spectacle  thrilling,  unique, 
unequalled.  No  wonder  those  present  and  those  who 
read  the  sensational  descriptions  are  carried  away  by 
it.  It  appeals  mostly  to  the  class  who  gaze  with 
admiration  on  all  display.  Rome  attracts  and  gains 
adherents,  Ruskin  said,  "  as  larks  are  lured  by  the 
glitter  of  bits  of  glass  into  a  trap."  Her  converts 
are  often,  to  use  an  Emersonianism,  "  victims  of  glare 
and  superstition."  Her  papal  ceremonials  appeal 
seductively  to  the  worldly  minded.  There  is  nothing 


342          CHRISTIAN   AND    CATHOLIC 

of  the  spirit  of  Christ  or  Christian  worship  in  this 
papal  pomp.  It  must  grieve  Christ  and  make,  if 
possible,  the  saints  and  angels  weep.  The  Russian 
and  Eastern  Churches  have  indeed  an  elaborate  sym- 
bolical ceremonial  accompanying  their  worship.  The 
spirit  of  devotion,  however,  runs  through  it  all. 
The  great  ceremonies  peculiar  to  the  papal  see,  on 
the  other  hand,  have  on  them  the  mark  of  a  worldly 
kingdom  as  they  are  intended  to  have.  This  worldli- 
ness  is  another  and  cumulative  reason  why  we  cannot, 
in  justice,  give  to  Rome  the  title  of  "  The  Holy  See." 
Its  true  name  should  rather  be  "  The  Worldly  See." 

There  is  an  agonizing  cry  going  up  in  our  day  for 
a  more  unworldly,  purer  Christianity.  Men  are  say- 
ing that  it  is  not  to  be  found  in  the  churches ;  that 
the  revelation  of  God  in  nature  contradicts  the  com- 
monly received  theology;  that  the  life  of  Christ  has 
been  overlaid  with  scholastic  dogmas ;  that  humanity 
has  been  neglected  for  ecclesiastical  interests.  The 
voice  of  the  Lord  is  to  be  heard  speaking  through 
the  nations.  If  the  Anglican  Church  is  to  meet  our 
century's  want,  she  must  be  filled  more  fully  with  the 
love  of  God  and  of  our  fellow-man.  She  must  ener- 
getically forward  every  enterprise  for  social  and  civic 
betterment.  She  must  become  in  action  what  she  is 
in  her  prayer-book.  But  she  will  not  become  united 
in  this  loving  work,  nor  realize  her  inherited  Catho- 
licity, until  her  members  are  convinced  that  the 
revival  of  Catholicity  does  not  purport  reunion  with 
Rome,  as  she  is,  and  submission  to  the  papal 
supremacy. 


CHAPTER  XIX 

SECESSIONS 

THE  great  revival  of  Catholicity  in  the  Anglican 
communion  stimulated  theological  investiga- 
tion in  every  department  and  every  direction.  It 
opened  the  long-closed  storehouse  of  patristic  learn- 
ing. It  studied  anew  the  great  Anglican  divines.  It 
gave  a  new  zest  to  biblical  research  and  exegesis.  It 
reread  with  the  aid  of  new  discoveries  the  history  of 
the  Reformation.  It  came  to  a  deeper  realization 
of  the  mystery  of  the  incarnation  and  its  extension  in 
the  sacraments.  The  whole  range  of  Catholic  theol- 
ogy came  out  in  more  vivid  colors  and  was  grasped 
with  a  new  and  more  intense  appreciation.  The 
movement  developed  higher  ideals  of  sanctity  and  a 
personal  self-sacrificing  devotion  in  clergy  and  laity. 
The  spiritual  poverty  of  the  Church's  ministrations 
to  the  people  came  to  be  keenly  realized.  Lives, 
talents,  means  were  lavishly  poured  out  at  the  feet  of 
Christ.  Perhaps  never  since  the  day  of  Pentecost 
has  there  been  a  spiritual  movement  so  learned,  so 
real,  so  intense.  Great  hopes  were  kindled  for  the 
Church's  progress.  Men  looked,  with  holy  desire, 
to  a  reunion  of  Christendom.  They  desired,  believ- 
ing in  Christ's  prayer,  to  think  it  possible.  But  so 
great  a  movement  was  sure  to  arouse,  to  the  utmost, 
the  animosity  of  Satan  and  all  his  malefic  cunning. 


344          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

In  every  conceivable  way  the  movement  was  har- 
assed and  attacked.  No  misrepresentation  was  too 
gross,  no  weapon  too  vulgar.  The  odium  theologi- 
cinn  was  aroused  to  an  exasperating  degree.  The  air 
was  thick  with  the  dust  of  controversy  and  contention. 
The  university  tribunals  were  appealed  to  in  Oxford, 
the  mobs,  in  the  east  of  London.  Bishops  charged 
against  it,  the  Times  and  other  newspapers  denounced 
it,  the  judges  of  the  privy  council  soiled  their  ermine 
by  their  displacement  of  law  in  behalf  of  policy. 

We  may  look  back  over  fifty  years  and  see  how 
the  cause  has  prospered,  for  it  was  of  the  Lord. 
Neither  the  ofttimes  folly  of  adherents  nor  the  blind- 
ness of  adversaries  could  stop  it.  But  like  some 
great  battle,  it  has  cost  untold  sacrifice  and  agonies 
of  soul.  It  has,  however,  by  its  furnace  fires  formed 
and  purified  many  to  a  high  degree  of  sanctity,  who 
are  now  resting  with  God.  In  the  time  of  prosperity 
[men  may  attain  salvation,  but  in  times  of  suffering 
(and  adversity  they  are  made  saints. 

It  could  not  also  but  be  that  under  the  exasperating 
and  depressing  temptations  some  were  found  who 
could  not  bear  the  strain  and  in  time  of  temptation 
fell  away.  They  laid  down  their  arms.  They  turned 
back  in  the  day  of  battle.  They  became  victims 
of  their  doubts  and  fears.  They  began  in  their 
recovery  of  old  truths  to  lose  sight  of  the  propor- 
tion of  the  faith,  to  question  their  position,  or,  at- 
tracted by  Rome's  external  appearance  of  unity,  to 
contrast  unfavorably  some  aspects  of  the  Anglican 
Church  with  that  of  Rome.  The  latter  church 
took  on,  to  their  imagination,  the  character  of  an 


SECESSIONS  345 

ideal  one.  They  confounded  the  decisions  of  the  civil 
courts  with  that  of  the  Church  herself.  They  lost 
faith  in  the  possibility  of  England's  Church  ever 
regaining  its  Catholic  heritage.  They  said  in  their 
despondency  "  Can  these  dry  bones  live?"  And  so 
from  one  ostensible  cause  or  another  they  sought 
relief  from  responsibility  by  surrender  to  Rome. 
Some,  mostly  women,  were  beguiled  by  the  fascinat- 
ing personality  and  artful  arguments  of  certain  skilled 
proselyters.  Comparatively  few  went  from  convic- 
tion after  a  candid  and  full  investigation  of  Scripture 
and  history.  It  was  remarked  in  the  early  days  of  the 
movement  that  the  Verts  were  not  found  among  the 
great  students  of  Holy  Scripture,  and  believers  in 
the  Church's  authority,  like  Pusey,  Keble,  Marriott, 
Isaac  Williams,  Neale,  and  others,  but  came  from  a 
class  of  restless,  speculating  minds  like  Newman, 
Ward,  or  poetical  and  imaginative  ones  like  Faber, 
Caswell,  or  ecclesiastic  politicians  like  Manning. 

Looking  at  the  Anglican  Church  as  she  is  to-day, 
we  see  her  extending  throughout  the  world.  She  is 
becoming  rehabilitated.  She  is  rising  again  in  her 
strength.  If  trials  exist  and  difficulties  confront  her 
they  are  diminishing  forces.  The  Catholic  church- 
men in  England  have  learned  not  to  be  affected  by 
decisions  of  State  courts.  They  have  learned  some- 
thing by  their  own  mistakes,  how  to  wait  on  God  and 
to  tarry  His  leisure.  It  is  His  Church  and  He  is 
working  out  plans,  not  our  plans  but  His  own.  We 
can  only  read  His  providences  as  they  accomplish 
themselves,  and  by  learning  to  conform  ourselves  to 
them.  Better  than  all  by  their  conferences  church- 


346         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

men  are  learning  to  trust  one  another  more,  and  to 
recognize  the  good  in  all  schools  of  thought.  Union 
within  the  Church,  it  is  being  felt,  must  first  be  won 
and  established  as  the  foundation  of  any  union  with 
those  without  or  with  sister  churches.  There  are 
great  grounds  of  encouragement  and  the  skies  are 
bright  with  hopefulness.  Only  let  churchmen  trust 
God  more,  get  together,  bear  with  one  another,  and 
the  Church  will  reap  her  joyful  harvest. 

It  is  true  that  Rome  is  busy  with  her  proselyting 
efforts,  endeavoring  to  unsettle  individuals,  especially 
those  in  the  early  and  unripe  stage  of  piety.  There 
are  those  who  make  this  work  of  proselyting  a 
business  and  study  the  art  of  injecting  doubt  into 
susceptible  minds.  And  it  is  one  of  their  common 
stock  arguments  to  refer  to  the  number  of  persons 
who  have  joined  the  Roman  Church.  Now  during 
the  past  thirty  years  there  have  been  in  England  no 
secessions  of  any  great  scholars,  and  in  America 
secessions  have  always  been  few.  There  are  some 
points,  however,  it  would  be  well  to  consider.  First, 
more  stay  than  go. 

The  movement  has  now  gone  on  for  some  seventy 
years,  and  during  this  time  it  would  be  safe  to  say 
there  have  been  about  seventy  thousand  clergy  in 
the  Anglican  communion.  These  clergy  are  brought 
up,  not  like  Roman  priests,  who  have  not  so  unre- 
stricted access  to  our  books,  but  with  the  oppor- 
tunity and  with  a  felt  duty  to  examine  fully  both 
sides  of  the  controversy  between  the  Anglican  Church 
and  Rome.  We  have  never  known  an  Anglican 
clergyman  who  has  not,  sometime  in  his  life,  honestly 


SECESSIONS  347 

and  sincerely  tried  to  do  so.  Considering  the  idio- 
syncrasies of  minds,  the  trials  in  the  English  Church, 
the  harsh  treatment  of  Catholic  churchmen,  the  de- 
spondency that  ofttimes  overtakes  a  priest,  the  allure- 
ments of  Rome,  the  wonder  is  that  so  few  have  gone 
over.  Yet  out  of  these  seventy  thousand  clergy, 
most  of  whom  have  conscientiously  examined  the 
controversy,  in  spite  of  all  the  trials  to  which  the 
Catholic  clergy  are  exposed,  only  a  fraction  of  one 
per  cent  has  decided  in  favor  of  Rome's  claims. 
When,  therefore,  the  convert-maker  without  or  the 
mischief-maker  within  points  out  that  some  one  of 
the  clergy  has  gone  to  Rome,  tell  him  that  there 
have  been  in  the  last  seventy  years  nigh  seventy 
thousand  who  on  their  knees  have  examined  the 
question  and  who  have  stayed. 

Another  point  it  is  well  to  keep  in  mind  is  this: 
More  have  left  Rome  and  come  to  the  Catholic 
position  than  have  left  and  taken  up  with  that  of 
Rome.  In  estimating  the  men  and  numbers  on  each 
side  we  must  take  into  account  the  fact  that  the 
influence  of  the  movement  was  not  confined  to 
England  but  spread  throughout  Europe.  Pusey, 
Liddon,  Bishop  Forbes,  and  others,  came  into  com- 
munication with  a  number  of  leading  Roman  Catholic 
doctors  and  professors  on  the  continent,  among 
whom  was  the  great  Dr.  Dollinger.  Anglican  books 
were  read,  and  the  Catholic  position  regarding  the 
papacy  was  cordially  recognized  by  these  great 
scholars.  So  that  when  the  Roman  Curia  sprang 
on  the  Western  Church  its  scheme  for  decreeing 
the  papal  infallibility  in  1870  there  was  a  revolt  in 


348          CHRISTIAN   AND    CATHOLIC 

Germany,  and  Reinkens  and  Weber  and  Schiiltz  and 
Herzog,  and  others,  with  nigh  a  hundred  thousand 
followers,  broke  with  Rome  and  established  the  old 
Catholic  communion.  When,  therefore,  any  one  talks 
about  Newman's  secession,  we  can  tell  him  it  was 
more  than  offset  by  Dr.  Dollinger's.  No  group  of 
English  Roman  converts  can  surpass  in  devotion  or 
learning  the  great  divines  who  have  left  Rome  on  the 
continent.  If  ten  thousand  of  the  laity  or  more  have 
joined  Rome  in  England,  ten  times  as  many  on  the 
continent  have  left  her.  So  let  us  hold  up  the  scales, 
and  while  there  is  a  small  pile  of  grains  of  sand  on  the 
Roman  side,  there  are  many  iron  pound  weights  on 
the  other.  For  more  under  the  influence  of  this 
Oxford  movement  have  left  Rome  than  have  joined 
her. 

But  it  is  asked,  what  takes  the  few,  who  do  go, 
over  to  Rome?  What  are  the  reasons  for  their 
'verting? 

So  far  as  our  knowledge  goes,  a  change  of  faith  is 
usually  preceded  by  a  period  of  spiritual  or  mental 
depression.  For  some  cause,  and  a  clergyman  is 
especially  liable  to  such  an  attack,  a  mist  of  de- 
spondency has  settled  on  his  soul.  He  has  allowed 
himself  to  become  more  and  more  critical  of  the 
failings  of  his  own  church,  and  has  gazed  at  them 
until  they  have  assumed  exaggerated  proportions. 
He  has  met  with  parochial  or  other  oppositions,  and 
not  with  the  success  he  expected.  He  has  had  an 
ideal  of  a  perfect  church  such  as  is  not  to  be  found 
in  Holy  Scripture.  He  has  made  certain  ceremonies, 
of  which  he  is  fond,  tests  of  orthodoxy.  He  has 


SECESSIONS  349 

allowed  himself  to  dwell  on  the  attractive  features  of 
Rome  until  his  imagination  has  made  her  an  ideal 
church.  As  the  elder  Pugin  said,  who  awoke  with  a 
great  shock  after  his  'version,  he  had  previously 
thought  Rome  was  a  church  filled  with  holy  clergy, 
holy  churches,  holy  monks,  holy  nuns,  holy  every- 
thing. He  has  been  disturbed  by  the  untheological, 
perhaps  misunderstood,  utterances  of  a  few  very  broad 
churchmen.  He  complains  of  the  laxity  of  discipline, 
though  not  unfrequently  he  has  in  his  independence 
disregarded  it  himself.  He  censures  the  bishops  for 
not  condemning  heretical  utterances,  forgetting  that 
only  a  very  few  years  ago  the  American  bishops  put 
forth  a  special  pastoral  in  the  strongest  terms  doing 
that  very  thing.  He  regards  the  clergy  and  bishops 
as  sadly  in  error,  not  realizing  that  the  Church's 
formal  utterance  is  to  be  found  in  her  prayer-book, 
and  that  the  failing  of  individual  teachers  is  no  reason 
why  one  should  leave  one's  post,  but  rather  why  one 
should  stay  there.  It  is  often  difficult  to  get  at  real 
reasons.  The  reasons  men  subsequently  assign  are 
apt  to  be  manufactured  explanations.  The  papers 
announce  with  great  flourish  that  a  priest  has  joined 
Rome,  and  those  acquainted  with  his  inner  life  may 
know  that  it  is  because  of  some  secret  sin,  disappointed 
ambition,  or  spiritual  pride.  For  the  most  part  the 
unsettlement  is  occasioned  by  some  unfaithfulness, 
increased  by  disappointments,  and  not  unfrequently 
accompanied  by  obvious  self-deceptions  and  deceit. 
Comparatively  few  go,  after  a  full  examination  of  the 
question,  with  the  determination  by  God's  grace  to 
go  or  stay  as  God  might  show  the  way. 


350         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

Secession  suggests  a  further  question.  What  has 
been  the  effect  on  the  spiritual  life  of  those  who  have 
left  the  Church  for  Rome?  Have  they  as  a  rule 
shown  by  their  lives  that  they  have  been  improved  by 
it?  We  know  that  thousands  have  come  to  us  in  this 
country  from  the  sects.  More  than  a  thousand  of  our 
American  clergy  and  bishops  are  converts.  Coming 
from  religious  motives  and  because  they  sought 
Christ's  Church,  we  find  that  after  a  while  there  is  a 
perceptible  advance  in  spirituality.  This  is  the  usual 
testimony.  However  good  Presbyterians  or  Congre- 
gationalists  or  Methodists  they  may  have  been,  after 
their  union  with  the  Church  there  is  an  obvious  in- 
crease in  spiritual  illumination  and  growth  in  holiness. 
Now  if  the  Roman  Church  is  the  only  true  church, 
and  is  alone  possessed  of  sacramental  grace,  the  same 
mark  of  improvement  ought  to  be  as  obvious  on  the 
bulk  of  her  converts  from  us.  But  what  is  the  case? 
According  to  the  account  of  some  who  have  tried  the 
experiment,  they  have  frankly  stated  that  they  were 
no  better  after  than  before.  Some,  a  small  class, 
become  apostates  and  give  up  the  faith  entirely.  Being 
men  of  a  critically  intellectual  turn  of  mind,  they 
found  that  they  and  others  fell  into  the  same  sins  as 
they  did  when  Anglicans,  and  that  the  Roman  sacra- 
ments gave  no  other  aid  than  that  they  had  previously 
received.  The  devil  then  had  them  in  a  logical  vise. 
They  had  denied  the  Anglican  sacraments  to  be 
channels  of  grace,  and  now  it  was  proved  the  Roman 
were  no  better,  and  so  nothing  was  to  be  believed. 
There  were  others  who  grew  spiritually,  but  no  more 
so  than  did  those  whom  they  had  left  behind.  No 


SECESSIONS  351 

one  would  say  that  Rome  had  any  holier  men  than 
Pusey  or  Keble  or  Carter. 

One  mark,  however,  was  upon  this  last  class  of 
converts.  They  were  not  content  with  Rome  as  they 
found  it.  Faber  developed,  so  old  Romans  said,  a 
new  Italian  Mariolatry  in  England.  He  could  not 
rest  till  the  Immaculate  Conception  had  been  decreed. 
Manning,  the  great  political  ecclesiastic,  must  work  to 
get  the  Roman  system  complete  to  his  satisfaction  by 
bringing  about  the  decree  of  the  "  Papal  Infallibility." 
While  Newman,  thwarted  by  Roman  intrigues  in  all 
of  his  three  plans,  for  a  new  translation  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, a  Catholic  university,  and  a  house  for  the 
Oratorians  at  Oxford,  stripped  of  his  former  influence, 
lay,  like  a  great  stranded  whale  thrown  up  on  the 
shore,  in  the  provincial  town  of  Birmingham.  Those 
who  knew  well  the  lives  of  the  converts  have  witnessed 
that  on  the  whole  it  was  not  satisfactory. 

We  cannot  conclude  without  pointing  out  the  sin  of 
secession.  A  churchman's  joining  Rome  is  a  very 
different  act  from  that  of  a  sectarian.  In  joining 
Rome,  the  churchman  must  submit  to  a  conditional 
baptism.  He  must  be  confirmed,  the  repetition  of 
which  sacrament  is  a  sacrilege.  By  receiving  his  so- 
called  first  communion  he  denies  that  he  has  before 
sacramentally  received  the  body  and  blood  of  the 
Lord.  If  a  priest,  he  denies  his  orders  and  the 
validity  of  his  sacraments.  In  all  these  acts  he  turns 
against  the  Holy  Ghost  and  his  Lord,  denying  their 
gifts  and  presence.  Moreover,  he  deserts  his  post. 
God  has  placed  him  in  the  Anglican  Church  there  to 
be  a  witness,  just  as  he  placed  Elijah  in  Israel  amidst 


352          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

its  worship.  It  was  very  trying  to  the  prophet  and  so, 
heartsick,  he  fled  away  to  the  wilderness.  But  there 
the  Word  of  the  Lord  searched  him  out  and  said, 
"  What  doest  thou  here,  Elijah."  It  is  just  as  much 
desertion  for  a  soldier  to  go  over  to  some  other  regi- 
ment or  place  on  the  battle-field  as  to  run  away. 
Having  the  faith  and  sacraments  and  free  from  schism 
we  must  stay  where  we  are  placed.  Secession  is  thus 
a  sin  presumptuous  and  deadly. 

It  is  the  most  presumptuous  sin  we  believe  a 
Christian  man  can  commit.  For  in  deciding  on  the 
claims  of  the  papal  supremacy  as  against  the  Eastern 
and  Anglican  Churches  in  favor  of  Rome,  he  assumes 
to  himself  the  powers  of  an  Ecumenical  council.  It 
is  an  act  full  of  spiritual  danger.  For  if  Rome  were 
right  in  her  claims,  God  could  not  condemn  one  who 
said  that  as  a  Catholic  he  had  not  ventured  to  assume 
an  authority  not  given  him ;  and  as  God  had  not  so 
ordered  it  that  a  council  of  the  whole  Church  had 
declared  the  papal  supremacy,  he  could  not,  by  his 
not  submitting  to  it,  be  found  guilty  of  disobeying 
Him. 

It  is  also  the  most  terrible  spiritual  sin  we  believe 
a  Christian  man  can  commit.  For  if  Anglican  orders 
and  sacraments  are  valid,  and  there  is  no  surer  proof 
of  the  existence  of  God  than  there  is  of  their  validity, 
he  denies  having  received  Christ  in  the  sacraments, 
and  so  perils  his  own  soul.  It  is  only  very  callow 
persons  who  are  caught  by  the  proselyter's  fallacy, 
"  You  Anglicans  say  we  Romans  can  be  saved,  but 
we  do  not  admit  this  about  yourselves.  As  a  matter 
of  prudence,  therefore,  come  with  us."  The  answer 


SECESSIONS  353 

is :  Catholics  believe  that  those  born  in  the  Roman 
communion  and  faithful  to  Christ  can  be  saved,  but 
assert  that  for  a  churchman  to  deny  his  sacraments, 
to  desert  his  post,  and  to  join  Rome  is  to  run  a  great 
risk  of  being  lost. 

Not  a  few  who  have  joined  Rome  have  felt  it  their 
duty  to  leave  her  and  return.  It  is  a  hard  and  hu- 
miliating task  to  acknowledge  they  have  made  a 
mistake.  It  requires  a  high  degree  of  Christian  for- 
titude to  resist  the  solicitations  of  friends  and  the 
threatenings  of  Roman  clergy.  But  it  is  the  way  of 
duty  and  honor,  and  the  only  way  to  make  reparation 
to  our  Blessed  Lord. 

Holding,  as  Anglican  Catholics  do,  the  most  impor- 
tant position  in  the  great  conflict,  they  are  exposed  to 
special  temptations,  and  none  more  subtle  than  to 
leave  their  posts.  They  become  depressed  with  the 
outlook.  They  have  an  ideal  of  what  the  kmg's 
daughter  ought  to  be ;  and  they  freely  criticise  and 
find  fault  with  their  own  communion  as  they  would 
not  that  God  should  criticise  themselves.  They  for- 
get that  as  God  bears  with  them,  so  He  bears  with 
His  Church.  Despondency  when  not  occasioned  by 
physical  causes  is  a  work  of  Satan.  Nothing  so 
helps  it  as  for  two  sympathizing  friends  to  talk  over 
together  the  evils  existing  in  the  Church.  It  may  be 
true  that  the  general  ignorance  and  prejudice  is  dis- 
mal and  virulent,  that  the  Agnostic  and  Erastian  spirit 
is  dominant,  that  Christianity  is  losing  its  hold,  that 
the  bishops  are  timid,  that  the  progress  of  the  Cath- 
olic cause  is  slow.  There  is  some  truth  in  all  this, 
but  the  more  of  truth  the  more  reasons  for  courage 

23 


354          CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

and  hope.  When  Israel  is  in  the  brick  kiln  then 
cometh  Moses.  In  the  fourth  watch  of  the  night  to 
the  tired  rowers  cometh  Jesus  on  the  waters.  "  Our 
checks,"  said  Dr.  Pusey,  "  have  always  turned  out  to 
be  our  greatest  blessings.  Let  us  tarry  the  Lord's 
leisure."  Let  us  remember  the  martyrs  and  confes- 
sors. Let  us  offer  the  holy  sacrifice  and  put  our  trust 
in  the  Lord. 


CHAPTER   XX 

ANGLICANISM   AND   REUNION 

THERE  are  among  others  these  glories  which 
belong  to  the  Anglican  Church.  The  first  is 
her  continuity.  She  is  not  a  sect  of  yesterday.  She 
is  not  a  man-made  organization.  She  did  not  begin, 
as  is  falsely  asserted,  with  King  Henry  the  Eighth. 
He  had  about  the  same  relation  to  her  as  Pontius 
Pilate  had  to  Christianity.  She  reaches  back  in  her 
history  to  Apostolic  times.  The  authority  and  spirit- 
ual powers  the  Lord  gave  His  Apostles  have  been 
transmitted  to  her.  The  golden  network  of  the  Apos- 
tolic succession  binds  its  bishops  and  clergy  to 
Christ.  At  the  Reformation  no  new  Church  was 
founded.  The  Catholic  Church  in  England  rejected 
the  mediaeval  growth  of  the  papacy  as  the  great 
Eastern  patriarchs  and  the  Orthodox  Churches  of 
the  East  had  done  before.  The  ancient  faith,  as 
declared  in  the  creeds  and  the  undisputed  Ecumeni- 
cal councils,  was  retained.  The  appeal  the  Church 
made  in  the  conduct  of  her  reforms  was  to  Holy 
Scripture  and  antiquity.  While  the  general  principle 
was  correct  in  the  undertaking,  no  doubt  some 
mistakes  were  made,  and  the  Church,  while  gaining 
much,  suffered  some  loss.  "  We  buy,"  as  Burke 
said,  "  our  blessings  at  a  price."  But  no  new 
church  was  created,  no  change  made  in  the  orders 


356         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

of  the  ministry.  The  priesthood  was  preserved  ;  the 
validity  of  the  sacraments  was  secured;  the  torch 
of  living  truth  was  handed  on. 

One  proof  of  this  is  to  be  found  in  the  fact  that  of 
the  fifty-six  hundred  clergy  who  celebrated  mass  in 
Queen  Mary's  reign,  only  about  some  three  hundred 
beneficed  clergy  are  known  to  have  refused  to  accept 
the  book  of  common  prayer  and  conform  in  the  reign 
of  Queen  Elizabeth.1  It  is  stated,  on  the  authority  of 
Chief  Justice  Coke,  in  a  charge  delivered  by  him  at 
Norwich,  that  the  pope  offered  to  allow  the  use  of  the 
book  of  common  prayer  if  the  queen  would  only  sub- 
mit to  his  supremacy.2  "  There  is  no  point,"  said 
the  non-Conformist  Professor  Beard  in  his  Hibbert 
lectures,  "  at  which  it  can  be  said,  '  Here  the  old 
Church  ends ;  here  the  new  begins.'  "  The  historian 
Freeman,  the  Lord  Chancellor  Selborne,  the  great 
statesman  Gladstone,  emphatically  said  so  likewise. 
Judge  Sir  Robert  Phillimore  declared,  "  It  is  not  only 
a  religious,  but  a  legal  error  to  suppose  that  a  new 
church  was  introduced  into  the  realm  at  the  time  of 
the  Reformation.  It  is  not  less  the  language  of  our 
law  than  of  our  divinity  that  the  old  church  was  re- 
stored, not  that  a  new  one  was  substituted."  Thus 
the  church  founded  and  organized  by  Christ  and 
His  Apostles  has  come  down  to  us  through  the  ages, 
bearing  the  majestic  treasures  of  the  Apostolic  order, 
the  life-giving  sacraments,  and  the  Catholic  faith. 

It  is  to  be  admitted  that  there  are  differences  of 
doctrinal  expression,  ceremonial,  and  practices  to  be 

1  Gee's  "  Elizabethan  Clergy." 

2  Strype,  "  Life  of  Archbishop  Parker." 


ANGLICANISM   AND   REUNION       357 

found.  These  are  often  made  a  target  by  Roman 
critics.  But  the  existence  of  different  schools  of 
theology  is  a  sign  of  interest  in  religion.  The 
Western  Church  has  its  Thomists  and  Scotists,  its 
Gallicans  and  Ultramontanes.  So  long  as  the  creeds 
and  dogmas  proclaimed  and  certified  by  the  whole 
Church  are  held,  differences  of  opinion  on  sub- 
ordinate points  are  allowable.  We  have  not  any 
such  bitterness  and  party  spirit  as  has  been  found  ex- 
isting between  contending  schools  in  Rome.  There 
are  extreme  dogmatists  and  men  of  exaggerated  utter- 
ances on  both  wings.  But  the  differences  between 
the  great  body  of  churchmen  are  not  so  great  as 
they  seem  to  superficial  observers,  or  as  the  interested 
advocates  would  make  them  out  to  be. 

It  is  a  help  in  understanding  these  differences  to 
remember  the  theological  distinction  between  dog- 
matic and  systematic  theology.  By  the  first  we 
mean  the  great  underlying  and  essential  facts  of  the 
Christian  faith,  and  the  creeds  and  the  accredited 
dogmas  put  forth  by  conciliar  authority  which  ex- 
press and  guard  them;  by  systematic  theology,  the 
philosophical  expressions,  theories,  and  explanations 
which  unite  them  scientifically  together.  Now  leaving 
out  the  extremists,  there  is  concerning  the  dogmatic 
faith  and  creeds  comparatively  little  difference.  The 
Anglican  Church  puts  the  creeds  and  liturgy  and 
ordinal  and  catechism  and  prayer-book  into  the 
hands  of  her  clergy,  and  bids  them  interpret  Holy 
Scripture  according  to  the  ancient  fathers.  Where 
this  is  honestly  done,  men  will  find  themselves 
standing  not  so  very  far  apart. 


358         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

It,  moreover,  is  to  be  observed  that  the  high  and 
low  schools  are  not  in  principle  antagonistic,  but  are 
supplementary  to  each  other.  The  low  churchman 
emphasizes  the  subjective  side  of  religion.  He 
dwells  on  the  sinfulness  of  man's  nature,  and  his 
redemption  by  the  atoning  efficacy  of  Christ's  cross, 
and  the  necessity  of  conversion  and  a  living  faith. 
The  high  churchman  dwells  on  the  objective  aspect 
of  religion.  Christianity  came  into  the  world  as  an 
institution.  An  Apostolic  ministry  is  essential  to 
connect  us  with  Christ's  authority.  The  sacraments 
are  the  ordained  channels  and  instruments  of  con- 
veying grace.  The  two  aspects  do  not  exclude  one 
another.  The  truth  lies  in  their  combination. 

Every  school,  high,  low,  or  broad,  has  its  own 
danger.  The  subjective  or  low  church  system,  un- 
balanced by  the  objective  side  of  religion,  leads  to  a 
denial  of  the  visible  Church,  its  priesthood,  and  the 
sacraments  as  instruments  and  effective  signs  of 
grace ;  the  broad,  or  rationalizing,  to  a  denial  of  all 
that  is  supernatural  in  God's  Word,  and  of  authority, 
and  the  Church's  inherited  dogmatic  faith.  The 
extreme  Catholic  or  pro-Roman  one,  by  his  devotion 
to  Western  scholasticism,  centralization  in  govern- 
ment, mistaken  interpretation  of  Scripture,  impatient 
with  the  condition  of  the  English  Church,  turns  in 
faint-heartedness  to  the  papacy. 

But  these  errors  lead  to  their  own  cure.  The 
divine  life  of  our  Church  is  no  more  forcibly  shown 
than  in  her  inherent  power  of  self-purification.  Christ 
is  in  her,  and  she  shares  in  His  indestructible  and 
resurrection  life.  The  faith  is  preserved  in  her,  not 


ANGLICANISM   AND   REUNION        359 

by  ecclesiastical  trials,  necessary  as  they  must  be. 
Extremes  lead  to  their  own  elimination;  and  so 
we  have  found  the  extreme  low  churchmen,  who 
deny  priesthood  and  sacramental  grace,  seceding 
from  the  Church  and  founding  a  new  sect,  called 
the  Reformed  Episcopalians.  They  tried  in  America 
to  get  the  Church  to  alter  the  prayer-book,  which 
they  admitted  was  not  in  accord  with  their  theology. 
It  taught,  they  said,  the  Apostolic  succession,  priest- 
hood, baptismal  regeneration,  and  the  real  presence. 
The  Church  refused  to  change  the  prayer-book,  and 
they  withdrew.  It  was  the  honest  course  to  pursue 
and  the  logical  outcome  of  their  theology.  Likewise 
Catholics,  who  have  become  pro-Romans,  believing 
in  the  divine  power  of  the  papacy,  and  our  duty  to 
submit  to  its  dominion,  naturally  gravitate  to  Rome. 
They  go  out  from  us  because  they  have  ceased  to 
be  Catholics  and  become  papists.  The  rationalizing 
broad  churchmen  who  deny  the  fundamental  facts 
of  the  creed,  such  as  the  virgin  birth  and  the  resur- 
rection of  Christ's  body,  are  eventually  pricked  by 
conscience,  which  tells  them  they  have  no  right  to  go 
on  saying  one  thing  at  the  altar  and  denying  it  in  the 
pulpit.  It  is  like  leading  a  double  life.  They  are  in 
a  false  position.  It  is  dishonorable  to  eat  the  bread 
of  the  Church  whose  creed  they  do  not  teach.  It  is 
far  better  for  all  those  who  do  not  believe  in  the  creed 
and  sacramental  system  of  the  Church  to  be  outside 
of  it.  They  then  are  delivered  from  the  sin  of  saying 
what  they  do  not  believe,  or  not  discerning  the  Lord's 
body  in  the  Eucharist,  and  so  eating  and  drinking  to 
their  own  condemnation. 


360         CHRISTIAN   AND   CATHOLIC 

In  Western  Christendom  a  tremendous  struggle  is 
going  on.  It  takes  two  forms,  —  one  in  the  Roman, 
another  in  the  Anglican  communion.  They  are  alike 
in  this,  that  Rome  is  having  her  struggle  with  the  State 
in  France,  and  the  Anglican  with  the  State  in  England. 
Both  churches  are  assailed,  in  France  by  unbelief 
in  Christianity,  in  England  by  unbelief  in  Catholicity. 
For  all  that  is  Catholic  our  sympathies  must  be  with 
the  French  Catholics,  and  we  can  but  sorrow  that  so 
many  priests  there  are  leaving  the  Church.  There 
is,  however,  a  difference  between  the  struggle  of 
the  English  Church  to  restore  the  Catholic  faith  and 
worship,  and  that  between  the  papacy  and  the  Italian 
Government.  The  two  contests  differ  radically.  The 
English  Church  is  trying  to  free  herself  in  things 
spiritual  from  State  control,  while  the  papacy  is  trying 
to  recover  her  lost  temporal  sovereignty.  The  one 
is  seeking  to  be  loosed  from  bondage  to  the  world's 
power ;  the  other  is  trying  to  make  herself  a  worldly 
power.  The  English  Church  is  struggling  to  resume 
her  spiritual  rights ;  the  papacy  is  plotting  to  regain 
her  earthly  sovereignty. 

The  positions  also  of  the  two  bodies  in  England 
are  very  different  positions.  The  Church  of  England, 
as  possessed  of  a  continuous  life  from  the  establish- 
ment of  Christianity  in  England,  alone  has  lawful 
jurisdiction;  while  the  new  modern  Italian  mission 
is  an  intruding  schismatical  organization.  Moreover, 
as  the  sin  of  schism  lies  with  that  party  that  compels 
withdrawal,  by  demanding  uncatholic  or  uncanoni- 
cal  terms  of  communion,  the  Church  of  Rome  is  in 
schism  everywhere.  She  is  in  schism  in  the  city  of 


ANGLICANISM   AND   REUNION       361 

Rome,  though  not  equally  and  for  the  same  reasons 
that  she  is  in  London.  Again,  the  English  Church 
(unlike  other  portions  of  the  Anglican  communion) 
is  suffering  from  her  present  connection  with  the 
State,  and  so  is  feeble  in  the  exercise  of  her  own 
courts  of  discipline ;  but  since  she  declares  the  faith 
in  her  formularies,  Catholics  are  not  committed  to 
heresy  by  communicating  with  her.  On  the  other 
hand,  while  the  Anglican  Church  is  succeeding  in 
recovering  the  faith  as  once  delivered,  and  by  all 
everywhere  received,  the  Romans  by  late  additions 
and  the  turning  of  what  were  once  acknowledged  to 
be  but  opinions  into  dogmas  of  the  faith  are  failing 
in  holding  fast  to  it. 

Again,  the  Anglican  Church  has  not  added  to  the 
faith,  while  the  Roman  has.  The  doctrine  of  the 
papal  infallibility  and  the  immaculate  conception 
of  the  Blessed  Virgin  cannot  bear  the  test  of  Cath- 
olicity. Neither  can  that  of  the  treasury  of  merits 
accumulated  by  the  saints'  works  of  supererogation, 
and  placed  at  the  disposal  of  the  pope,  on  which 
the  modern  system  of  indulgences  is  based.  The 
withdrawal  of  the  chalice  from  the  laity  is  in  con- 
tradiction of  the  universal  custom  of  the  Catholic 
Church  for  over  a  thousand  years,  and  that  of  the 
Eastern  Church  to-day.  And  while  no  one  would 
question  the  marvellous  grace  bestowed  on  the  ever- 
blessed  Theotokos,  the  Bringer-Forth  of  God,  yet  the 
assigning  to  her  the  position  and  office  of  the  neck 
of  the  mystical  body  through  whom  all  graces  must 
pass  from  the  head  to  the  members,  is  no  part  of  the 
original  deposit  of  the  faith.  It  is  not  the  language 


362          CHRISTIAN  AND   CATHOLIC 

of  the  fathers  to  say  "  God  has  constituted  Mary  as 
the  ordinary  dispensatrix  of  His  grace,"  nor  that  it 
is  safer  to  go  to  the  Blessed  Virgin  than  to  our  Lord, 
or  that  "  Mary  so  loved  the  world  that  she  gave  her 
only  begotten  Son."  "Mary  is  the  most  faithful 
mediatrix  of  our  salvation."  "  Thou,  O  Mary,  art  the 
propitiatory  of  the  whole  world."  "  From  whom  thou 
turnest  away  thy  face  there  shall  be  no  hope  of  salva- 
tion." "  It  is  impossible  any  sinner  can  be  saved, 
save  through  thy  help  and  favor,  O  Virgin."  "  For 
whom  the  justice  of  God  save  not,  Mary  saves  by 
her  intercession,  by  infinite  mercy."  "The  nation 
and  kingdom  which  shall  not  serve  thee,  shall 
perish." l 

The  Anglican  Church  is  thus  seen  to  be  free  from 
the  charge  of  schism,  and  her  formularies  from  her- 
esy. On  the  other  hand,  Rome  is  both  schismatical 
and,  as  testified  by  her  decrees  and  accredited  teach- 
ers, in  error.  It  follows  that  while  Anglican  Catholics 
are  not  committed  to  heresy  by  communicating  in 
the  Anglican  Church,  because  there  may  be  some 
heretics  in  it,  yet  to  enter  the  Roman  communion  is 
to  make  oneself  responsible  as  a  partaker  of  author- 
ized schism  and  formally  promulgated  heresy.  It  is 
painful  to  write  this,  for  all  that  is  Catholic  in  the 
Latin  communion  we  love,  but  in  the  presence  of 
efforts  to  unsettle  the  faith  of  English  Church  mem- 
bers, loyalty  to  the  Catholic  faith  requires  it. 

If  Anglicans  are  ever  desponding,  they  have  only  to 
look  to  the  past  and  see  how  God  has  protected  their 

1  See  Dr.  Pusey's  "Sermon  on  Rule  of  Faith,"  pp.  50,  58,  and 
"  Eirenicon."  i  vol. 


ANGLICANISM   AND   REUNION       363 

communion.  A  branch  cut  off  from  the  tree  must 
perish,  but  a  living  branch  is  known  by  its  persistent 
vitality  and  fruit.  Assaulted,  as  seldom  any  portion 
of  the  Church  of  Christ  has  been,  during  the  past 
three  hundred  years,  it  has  by  its  inherent  power  re- 
sisted all  attacks  and  emerged  a  victor.  Neither  the 
assaults  of  Rome  under  Mary,  nor  of  the  Puritans 
under  Cromwell,  nor  the  disaster  of  the  non-jurors' 
withdrawal  in  the  seventeenth,  nor  the  Erastianism 
of  the  eighteenth  century,  nor  all  the  worldly  com- 
binations of  the  nineteenth,  have  crushed  out  her 
Catholicity. 

And  not  least  of  God's  goodness  to  her  is  seen  in 
two  great  providences.  The  first  was  the  early  death 
of  King  Edward  VI.  He  was  followed  by  Queen 
Mary  of  unhappy  memory.  But  the  evils  wrought 
by  Mary  were  temporary  ones.  Had,  however,  King 
Edward  lived,  the  Church  would  have  lost  its  Catholic 
heritage.  With  all  the  tyrannous  spirit  of  a  Tudor 
monarch  and  all  the  narrowness  and  self-conceit  of  a 
reforming  Calvinist,  the  King  would  have  made  the 
Church  like  unto  the  deformity  of  the  Continental 
reformers.  We  read  in  Strype's  "  Memorials  of 
Cranmer"  that  the  king  had  determined  to  make 
further  changes,  and  if  the  bishops  refused,  to  make 
them  on  his  own  authority.  The  continuity  of  the 
Church  would  have  become  so  broken,  and  her 
Catholic  doctrine  so  marred,  that  she  would  have 
largely  lost  her  heritage  and  become  a  withered 
branch  of  Christ's  Church.  God  preserved  the  Church 
by  Edward's  merciful  removal. 

Another,  and  we  deem  it  the  next  great  providential! 


364          CHRISTIAN   AND    CATHOLIC 

blessing  vouchsafed  the  Anglican  Church,  was  the 
denial  of  the  validity  of  our  orders  by  Leo  XIII.  It, 
like  the  former  providence,  has  wrought  in  a  wonder- 
ful way  for  the  preservation  of  the  Anglican  Church. 
It  has  helped  to  unite  her  members,  has  painfully 
revealed  to  us  the  worldly  policy  that  governs  the 
papacy,  has  destroyed  the  possibility  of  any  belief  in 
the  papal  infallibility,  has  dissipated  the  dreams  of 
corporate  reunion  with  Rome,  has  helped  to  fill  the 
Church  with  new  courage,  and,  fixing  her  gaze  on  her 
true  mission,  to  discern  the  mighty  work  of  evangeli- 
zation she  may  do  for  God.  Had  the  pope  decided 
otherwise,  it  is  impossible  to  estimate  the  strong  tide 
of  love  and  trust  that  would  have  impulsively  turned 
towards  him.  But  providentially  he  did  not  so  declare. 
Anglicans  know  they  possess  valid  orders  and  sacra- 
ments. They  can  no  more  doubt  this  than  the  exist- 
ence of  God  or  any  essential  fact  of  Christianity.  So 
that  when  the  pope  decided  against  what  Anglicans 
knew,  with  a  divine  certainty,  to  be  true,  they  knew 
with  the  same  certainty  that  he  was  not  infallible.  It 
was  seen  to  be  a  decision  as  contrary  to  the  truth  as 
when  he  condemned  Galileo  and  the  planetary  system. 
So,  for  many,  the  glamour  of  the  papacy  passed  away, 
and  the  papal  curia,  looked  at  calmly  and  dispassion- 
ately, was  seen  to  be  but  a  piece  of  skilfully  con- 
structed human  machinery.  The  papal  idol,  to  which 
some,  not  discerning  its  real  worldly  origin  and 
character,  had  begun  to  turn,  went  down  like  that  of 
Dagon  before  the  Ark  of  the  Lord.  Corporate  union 
with  Rome,  as  she  is,  is  seen  to  be  beyond  the  range 
of  human  possibility,  and  not  the  terminus  of  the 


ANGLICANISM   AND   REUNION       365 

Tractarian    movement,    or    the    leading    of   Divine 
Providence. 

But  while  this  is  so,  there  are  brightening  prospects 
in  the  East.     Thither,  it  would   seem,  God's  provi-  0      h^v, pr 
dence  is  directing  us.     The  venerable  orthodox  Rus-  ~" 
sian  and  Greek  Church  is  turning  to  us  with  friendly^'' 
expressions  of  interest.     She  says,  "  We  do  not  ask 
you,  as  Rome  does,  to  '  submit,'  we  only  ask,  '  Do    v>-  ^\^ 
you  hold  the  same  Catholic  faith  we  have  inherited 
from  the  Fathers?  '     If  you  do  this,  we  are  brothers." 
When  we  consider  that  the  East  has  been  but  little 
affected   by   the   schoolmen,  and    had   not  to   pass 
through  the  convulsions  of  a  Reformation,  and  has 
for  nine  hundred  years  borne  consistent  witness  for 
the  faith  once  delivered,  and  against  Roman  errors, 
Anglicans  should  be  willing  to  free  themselves  from 
their  prejudices  and  somewhat  self-conceit,  and  listen 
to  her  kindly  words. 

The  Church,  indwelt  by  Christ,  guided  by  the 
Holy  Spirit,  is  a  living  organism,  and  we  may  trust 
the  Voice  of  God  speaking  through  her  before  she 
was  rent  into  Eastern  and  Western  divisions.  The 
Voice  of  God  speaking  to  the  churches  is  not  confined, 
as  some  Anglicans  seem  to  think,  to  any  particular 
centuries.  But  in  the  seven  Ecumenical  councils  we 
have  the  Voice  of  the  Spirit  and  in  the  seven  holy 
mysteries,  the  means  of  grace. 

The  question  presenting  the  most  difficulty  has  to 
do  with  the  Filioque.  There  is  no  difference  in  belief 
between  the  Anglican  communion  and  the  venerable 
East  on  the  doctrine  of  the  Filioque,  but  without 
Ecumenical  consent  it  has  no  right  to  be  in  the  Creed. 


366         CHRISTIAN  AND   CATHOLIC 

May  God  inspire  the  wise  men  of  the  Church  to  solve 
the  difficulty.  Each  church  in  the  case  of  restored 
intercommunion  would  retain  its  own  independent 
government  and  liturgy.  Anglicans  and  Easterns 
must  be  content  with  agreement  in  the  ancient  faith, 
—  not  in  the  uniformity  of  its  outward  expression. 
While  the  faith  is  unchangeable,  the  Church,  as  the 
bride  of  Christ,  has  been  led  to  follow  her  Lord's  life, 
and  sometimes  has  been  more  absorbed  in  devotion 
to  His  incarnation,  sometimes  to  His  passion.  The 
faith  abides  from  age  to  age;  but  ceremonies  and 
practices  of  devotion  are  the  fresh  outcome  of  the 
Church's  love.  The  East  and  the  West  have  their  own 
ceremonial  traditions,  and  the  differences  existing 
should  not  hinder  the  restoration  of  Christian  recog- 
nition and  fellowship. 

If  a  reunion  of  Christendom  is  to  be  attained,  it 
will  come  through  the  union  of  the  Anglican  and 
Eastern  Churches.  It  is  in  this  direction  the  safe 
guiding  providence  of  God  directs  His  people.  It 
requires  largeness  of  vision  and  generous  toleration 
of  unessential  differences,  and  much  of  the  charity 
that  hopeth  all  things,  believeth  all  things,  and  of  the 
faith  that  believes  that  with  God  all  things  are  pos- 
sible. For  so  glorious  a  consummation  Anglicans 
must  be  willing  to  recognize  the  devotion,  the  mis- 
sionary zeal,  and  the  orthodoxy  of  the  Russian  and 
Greek  Churches.  The  cause  of  the  reunion  of 
Christendom  is  the  dearest  to  the  heart  of  Christ. 
What  saints  have  longed  and  prayed  for,  let  the 
Catholics  of  to-day  labor  to  accomplish.  We  can 
do  much  by  learning  more  of  the  Easterns  and  their 


ANGLICANISM  AND   REUNION        367 

worship,  and  studying  their  catechism.  The  all- 
availing  power  of  the  Holy  Sacrifice  is  ours  and  the 
promise  of  answer  to  prayer  in  His  Name.  May  the 
sacrifice  of  the  altar  be  more  frequently  offered  for 
the  reunion  of  Christendom,  and  the  prayer  of  blessed 
Bishop  Andrews  be  more  in  use  among  us  !  — 


Bless,  ®  gracious  JFatljer,  tty  ^olp  Catholic 
C  imrci)  ;  fill  it  toitt)  trutl)  anD  grace  ;  inhere  it  is  cor- 
rupt, purge  it  ;  toljere  it  is  in  error,  Direct  it  ;  totjere 
it  is  superstitious,  rectify  it  ;  toljere  it  is  amiss,  re- 
form it  ;  ujljrrr  it  is  rigiit,  strengthen  ant)  confirm 
it;  uiljere  it  is  DtUiDcD  ant)  rent  asunuer,  liral  the 
breaches  of  it,  <$  ^tjou  ^ofy  <Dne  of  ^Israel  ;  t^roug^ 
31esus  Christ  our  ilort). 

31esu  tiear,  3f|e0u  bless,  3Iesu  anstoer  our  petition, 
for  tty  ^ert^'s  sabe. 

Laus  Or  o, 


INDEX 


INDEX 


ALEXANDER,   Bishop  of  Deny, 

9,95 

ALEXANDRIA,  Council  of,  184 
ANGLICAN  ORDERS,  from  earliest 
formation  of  the  Anglican 
Church  in  possession  of  Apos- 
tolic Ministry,  188;  objec- 
tions of  Sectarians  and  Roman 
Catholics  based  on  ignorance 
or  on  policy,  189;  prima  facie 
proof  of  Anglican  orders  being 
valid  that  she  claims  and  acts 
as  if  she  had,  194;  preserves 
carefully  distinctions  between 
the  three  orders,  194;  succes- 
sion through  three  lines  of 
descent,  197;  Irish  line,  198; 
Archbishop  of  Spalato,  198; 
Archbishop  Parker,  199;  Lin- 
gard,  Eastcourt,  Cyriacus, 
Dollinger,  Courayer,  on 
Parker's  consecration,  199; 
Barlow's  call,  201;  validity 
of  ordinal  by  which  he  was 
consecrated,  203;  intention  of 
its  framers,  207;  its  valid 
matter  and  form,  209 
ANGLICANISM  AND  REUNION,  the 
glories  belonging  to  the  Angli- 
can Church,  355;  her  con- 
tinuity, 356;  the  different 
schools  within  her  supplemen- 
tary of  each  other,  356  seq.; 


theological  distinction  between 
dogmatic  and  systematic  the- 
ology, 357;  every  school  has 
its  danger,  358;  these  errors 
lead  to  their  own  cure,  358; 
Anglican  Church  free  from 
schism,  360;  Church  of  Eng- 
land suffering  from  her  present 
connection  with  the  State, 
361;  Anglican  Church  has 
not  added  to  the  faith,  361; 
Two  great  providences,  early 
death  of  Edward  VI  and 
Leo  X's  declaration,  363; 
brightening  prospects  in  East, 
365;  reunion  of  Christendom 
will  come  through  union  of 
Anglican  with  East,  366 
AUGUSTINE,  ST.,  106 

BAPTISM,  Holy,  218  seq. 
BOSSUET,  on  Bishops  receiving 
jurisdiction  from  Pope,  329 

CARLO  BORROMEO,  ST.,  state  of 

clergy  in  Milan,  197 
CARROLL  (R.C.),  consecrated  by 

one  Bishop  only,  202 
CELSUS,  50 
CHILLING  WORTH,  132 
CHRIST,  certainty  of  His  earthly 

life   and   death,    20;    modern 

French  Orator,  Christ  is  Prog- 


372 


INDEX 


ress,  21 ;  came  as  fulfilment 
of  prophecy,  21;  man's  prom- 
ised Deliverer,  21;  deliverer 
of  seed  of  Abraham,  22;  of 
tribe  of  Judah,  23;  rod  of  stem 
of  Jesse,  23;  His  three-fold 
offices,  prophet,  priest  and 
king,  23-24;  certified  to  world 
by  special  herald,  25;  born  in 
Bethlehem,  25;  preaching  glad 
tidings  and  doing  gracious 
works,  25;  enter  Jerusalem  in 
triumph,  25,  betrayed,  25; 
put  to  death,  25;  incidents 
of  crucifixion  foretold,  26; 
prophecy  of  Christ  in  cere- 
monial law,  26;  heathen  poets 
and  philosophers  Virgil  and 
Plato  prophesied,  27;  a 
teacher  sent  by  God,  30; 
independent  of  His  race  and 
time,  31;  contrasted  with 
Caesar  and  Mahomet,  31; 
declared  Fatherhood  of  God 
over  all  the  race  and  univer- 
sality of  His  religion,  32; 
comes  not  as  common  de- 
stroying reformer,  33;  His 
energetic  action  not  spas- 
modic, 33;  combines  in  Him- 
self masculine  and  feminine 
excellence,  33;  harmony  in 
Him  of  the  active  and  con- 
templative life,  34;  His  adher- 
ence to  duty,  34;  quotation  by 
Liddon,  35;  condemns  evil 
in  all  its  forms,  35-36;  can 
gaze  into  the  inner  temple  of 
His  life,  36-37;  worked  out 
no  self-designed  plan,  37; 


spoke  with  authority,  38; 
gradually  led  Apostles  to 
recognition  of  Himself,  39; 
culminating  characteristic  sin- 
lessness,  39;  witnessed  to  by 
friends  and  foes,  40;  His 
testimony  about  Himself,  41; 
greater  than  Temple,  41; 
Lord  of  the  Sabbath,  41; 
sender  of  Holy  Spirit,  42; 
revealer  of  the  Father,  42; 
Judge  of  all  men,  42;  Synop- 
tists  set  forth  historical  set- 
ting of  His  life,  43;  St.  John, 
its  meaning  and  influence  44; 
Renan,  Channing,  Walker, 
Rousseau  witness  to  Christ 
CLEMENT,  ST.,  Corinthian  Epis- 
tle, 301 

COMMUNION  OF  SAINTS,  258 
CONFIRMATION,  Holy,  223 

DECRETALS,  forged,  332 
DOLLINGER,  298 

EASTCOURT  (R.C ),  on  the  cer- 
tainty of  Parker's  consecra- 
tion, 200 

ETERNAL  LIFE,  consummation 
of  creation,  its  union  to  God  in 
Jesus  Christ,  86;  sin  did  not 
frustrate  God's  scheme,  87; 
Maurice,  87;  theory  of  late 
French  critic,  87;  where  it 
breaks  down,  88;  the  three 
evils  removed  on  Calvary,  89; 
man's  redemption  springs  out 
of  the  love  of  the  Blessed 
Trinity,  89;  Christ  brought 
four  gifts,  truth,  an  example, 


INDEX 


373 


deliverance  from  sin  and  death, 
eternal  life,  90-95;  Bishop 
Alexander  of  Deny,  95;  gave 
us  Baptism  and  Eucharist,  95; 
in  what  way  the  heathen  and 
the  people  before  Christ  could 
be  made  partakers  of  Him,  96; 
why  God  should  require  this 
process  of  Redemption,  97; 
St.  Athanasius,  98;  final  cause 
of  Redeemer's  work,  98;  eter- 
nal life,  what  it  is,  99;  and  how 
attained,  101;  must  accept 
Christ's  terms,  103 
EUCHARIST,  58,  165 

FABER,  351 

FAITH  OF  CATHOLICS,  141 
FAITH,  THE  RULE  OF,  differences 
among  Christians,  127;  how 
shall  a  Christian  know  what  he 
ought  to  believe,  128;  some 
say  one  denomination  best 
suited  to  our  class  or  tempera- 
ment, 128;  but  differences 
involve  essential  doctrine,  128; 
nullification  of  Sects  bends  to 
competition,  129;  but  hinders 
unbelievers,  129;  Christ  must 
have  left  way  by  which  inquir- 
ers may  learn  what  to  believe 
and  do,  130;  this  way  must 
be  the  best  and  safest,  131; 
three  rules  of  faith  proposed, 
132;  Protestant  and  Bible 
only,  132;  Roman  and  Church 
as  an  institution  under  the 
Pope's  rule,  134;  Siberino, 
137;  Zosimus  and  Pelagians, 
138;  Honorius  and  Monothe- 


lite  contest,  138;  Innocent 
III,  Innocent  IV,  and  Adrian 
VI  set  councils  above  Popes, 
139;  wrongful  decisions  of 
various  Popes,  139;  Keenan's 
Catechism  141;  faith  of  Cath- 
olics, 141 ;  true  rule  the  Cath- 
olic, 142;  four  points,  142; 
Christ  reveals,  142;  the  Holy 
Spirit  guards  it,  143;  the 
Church  utters  it,  144;  God 
has  overruled  divisions  for 
good,  145;  Anglican  Church 
not  reduced  to  dogmatic  help- 
lessness, 145;  Lincoln  judg- 
ment, 145;  Colenso  Christian 
soul  knows  the  truth,  145 

HOLY  ORDERS,  233.  (See  CHRIS- 
TIAN MINISTRY) 

HOLY  SEE,  the,  Rome's  claim 
to  the  title,  331;  Holiness 
one  of  the  marks  of  Catholic 
Church,  331;  some  historical 
features  of  that  See,  332; 
fraudulent  Nicene  canon  ex- 
posed at  Chalcedon,  331; 
passage  in  St.  Augustine  on 
Bible  corrupted,  332;  fable 
of  the  thirty  Popes  before 
Constantine,  332;  spurious 
epistles  of  Pope  Julius,  332; 
forged  decretals,  332;  Gra- 
tian's  Decretum,  333;  Vicar 
of  Christ,  334;  power  claimed 
by  Hildebrand  and  Innocent 
III  over  secular  kingdoms, 
334;  infallibility  decree,  334; 
many  Popes  dissolute,  336; 
See's  record  stained,  337; 


374 


INDEX 


worldly  ambition,  337;    tem- 
poral sovereignty,  338;   Popes 
against  Italy's  freedom,  339 
HUMPHREY  (S.J.),  on  power  of 
Papacy,  295 

IGNATIUS,  ST.,  182 
KEENAN'S  "Catechism,"  141 

LAUD,  Archbishop,  union  of 
three  lines  in  him,  197 

LAUNOY,  collection  from  the 
Fathers  as  to  "Rock,"  328 

LIDDON,  32,  45 

LINGARD,  admits  Barlow's  con- 
secration, 199,  201 

LOVE  AND  SERVICE,  love  the 
essence  of  God's  nature,  105; 
three  manifestations  of  love, 
105;  love's  welcome,  105; 
the  eternal  treasure  of  God's 
unselfish  love,  106;  ST. 
AUGUSTINE,  106;  St.  Thomas 
Aquinas,  106;  St.  Vincent  de 
Paul,  106;  our  Lord  knows 
our  faults,  yet  loves  us,  107; 
the  world's  crowns  and  songs 
are  for  success,  109;  Divine 
love  gives  them  to  the  beaten, 
109;  love's  progress,  109; 
each  advance  preceded  by 
fresh  purificative  action,  no; 
hate  and  fear,  no;  for- 
titude, 112;  three  attractive 
forces  exciting  three  root  sins, 
113;  three  antagonistic  forces 
on  the  side  of  God,  114;  our 
spiritual  life  a  journey  in  its 
purificative,  illuminative  and 


unificative    stage,    114,  120; 

love's     response,      120;  the 

work    of    Holy    Spirit,  121; 
what  shall  we  do?  122 

MANNING,  305,  351 

MATRIMONY,  233 

MILTON,  89 

MINISTRY,  the  Christian:  So- 
ciety of  "Friends,"  169;  wor- 
ship by  sacrifice  demands  a 
priesthood,  169;  Old  Testa- 
ment prophecies,  170;  Christ 
a  Priest,  172;  urged  that  He 
did  not  call  Himself  a  Priest, 
172;  Epistle  to  Hebrews,  172; 
mystical  body  of  Christ  iden- 
tified with  His  priesthood, 
173;  New  Testament  refer- 
ences, 173;  Moberly,  173; 
Apostles  ordained,  174;  this 
method  has  characteristic  of 
divinity,  174;  case  of  Mat- 
thias, 177;  case  of  St  Paul, 
178;  ordination  by  Apostles 
of  successors,  180;  the  three- 
fold ministry,  181;  the  pres- 
byters proved  by  Scripture  to 
be  priests  in  Old  Testament 
sense,  182. 

MOBERLY,  Dr.,  173 

NEWMAN,    Cardinal,    191,    311, 


PAPACY  'SECULARIZED,  337 
PAPAL  INFALLIBILITY,  136  seq. 
PENITENCE,  226 

PETER    AND    JOHN,    SS.,     St. 
Peter    the    representative    of 


INDEX 


375 


old  dispensation,  281;  foun- 
dation-layer, 281;  contrast 
prominence  of  St.  Peter  with 
that  of  St.  John,  282;  con- 
trast of  age,  282;  state,  283; 
two  references  to  their  respect- 
ive homes,  283;  different 
manner  in  which  called  to 
discipleship,  283;  new  names 
and  titles  given  to  each,  284; 
Christ  preaches  out  of  Peter's 
boat,  284;  their  respective 
positions  declared  by  their 
questions  to  Christ,  286;  Old 
Testament  spirit  seen  in  Peter, 
287;  spirit  of  new  kingdom 
in  John,  287;  rebukes  admin- 
istered by  our  Lord  to  both 
examined,  288;  each  needed 
spiritual  transformation,  289; 
process  of  Peter's  conver- 
sion, 290;  relative  spiritual 
positions  of  two  Apostles  at 
Last  Supper,  291;  at  empty 
tomb,  291;  Quo  vadis,  292; 
miracle  of  John's  preserva- 
tion, 292 

PETER,  ST.,  AT  ROME,  quotation 
from  Humphrey's  Urbs  et 
Orbis  on  plenitude  of  Papal 
power,  294  seq;  Rome  must 
prove  claim  that  Peter  ordained 
and  instituted  successor,  295; 
personal  transmission  of  au- 
thority from  Peter  through 
successors  to  new  incumbent, 
296;  Peter's  connection  with 
Rome  argumentative  or  cir- 
cumstantial, 298;  Bellinger's 
argument  examined,  298;  the 


romantic  and  ecclesiastic  ac- 
counts of  Peter's  visit,  299; 
ending  of  the  Epistle,  300; 
Clement's  Epistle  to  Corin- 
thians, 301;  Irenaeus  on  Her- 
esies, 302;  Tertullian,  302; 
Eusebius,  302;  three  com- 
ments made  on  evidence,  303 
PETER,  ST.,  Roman  claims,  263; 
supreme  headship  and  uni- 
versal jurisdiction,  263;  two 
elements,  primacy  and  priest- 
hood, 263;  prominence  of  St. 
Peter  in  Joseph,  264;  other 
Apostles  have  special  desig- 
nation of  office  and  honor, 
265;  St.  John,  St.  Paul,  265; 
suggestive  order  in  which  the 
three  great  Apostles  pass 
across  field  of  history,  266; 
the  things  said  of  St.  Paul  of 
equal  significance  with  those 
said  of  St.  Peter,  267;  calling 
of  the  two  Apostles  different, 
268;  St.  Peter's  small  share 
in  election  of  St.  Matthias; 
St.  Paul's  share  in  estab- 
lishment and  ordination  of 
ministry,  269;  Deliquey,  269; 
Abb6  Fouard,  269;  Pre- 
eminence of  St.  Paul  in  Church 
discipline,  270;  contrast  of 
two  Apostles  in  importance  of 
their  visions,  292;  their  mir- 
acles, 274;  their  deliverances 
from  prison,  275;  their  preach- 
ing, 276;  their  mutual  relation- 
ship, 278;  significant  manner 
of  their  respective  passing 
from  Scripture  record,  279 


376 


INDEX 


PLATO,  27 

POLE,  Cardinal,  199 

POPES,  Adrian  VI,  139;  Alex- 
ander VI,  336;  Celestine,  in, 
139;  Eugenius  IV,  139,  208; 
Gelasius,  139;  Gregory,  u, 
139;  Gregory  XVI,  335; 
.  Hildebrand,  333;  Honorius, 

137,  138;     Innocent    I,    139; 
Innocent  III,  139,  333;   Inno- 
cent IV,  139;  Julius  III,  203; 
Leo  XIII,  203,  364;   Liberius, 

138,  332;  Nicholas  I,  139,  332; 
Paul  IV,   203,   205;    Stephen 
II,     139;      Urban     II,     139; 
Zosimus,  138 

RELIGION,  definition,  3;  School- 
men's definition  of  God  as 
pure  activity,  4;  unity  of 
material  universe,  4;  mathe- 
matics the  universal  language, 
4;  structure  of  Universe  man- 
ifestation of  pure  mathemati- 
cal thought,  5;  difference 
between  reason  and  instinct, 
5;  instinct  wisdom  in  action, 
5;  Energy  Eternal  and  In- 
telligent is  a  Will,  5 ;  anecdote 
of  Indian  teacher,  6;  intel- 
ligent will-energy  must  be  a 
person,  7;  self-consciousness 
personality,  7;  Pantheism, 
7;  knowledge  of  God  neces- 
sary, not  only  belief,  8;  St. 
Thomas  Aquinas,  9;  Bishop 
Alexander,  of  Deny,  9;  Re- 
ligion not  generated  from 
non-religious  elements,  10; 
three  degrees  of  Union  between 


God  and  man,  n;  nature, 
grace  and  glory,  n;  God's 
immanence  in  nature,  u; 
Browning,  n;  St.  Gregory 
II,  his  errors  as  to  Divine 
immanence,  n,  12;  Pusey, 
12;  "Sayings  of  Jesus,"  13; 
God  not  author  of  sin,  13; 
religion  source  of  strength,  15; 
of  joy,  15;  certain  presenta- 
tions of  religion  ignore  earthly 
enjoyment,  15;  Christian 
view,  16;  being  element  in 
our  nature  presents  in  several 
forms  besides  Christianity, 
18;  but  the  Christian  religion 
gives  us  noblest  conception  of 
God,  19;  as  ever  having  triple 
personality,  19 

RENAN,  44 

RESURRECTION  or  CHRIST,  great 
credential  to  His  mission  and 
Divinity,  46;  foretold  death 
and  resurrection,  46;  no 
further  proofs  needed  by 
Christian,  47;  what  corrobo- 
rative evidence  is  there?  47; 
Sunday,  not  the  Jewish  Sab- 
bath, universally  kept  as  the 
Christian  holy-day,  48;  theory 
of  swoon  and  subsequent 
reanimation  refuted,  48;  cru- 
cifixion public,  49;  numbers 
desired  His  death,  48;  spear 
thrust,  48;  Strauss'  contempt 
for  theory,  48;  why  no 
appearance  to  Pilate  and 
Priests,  50;  morally  better 
for  them,  50;  and  He  had  done 
His  work  in  the  world,  51; 


INDEX 


377 


beginner  of  new  elevation  in 
evolutionary  process,  51; 
resurrection  not  return  to 
former  life,  51;  died  by  His 
own  Will,  51;  did  not  come 
back  to  old  conditions  of  life, 
52;  the  five  proofs  of  resur- 
rection given  by  enemies,  52; 
bound  to  produce  today  from 
sealed  tomb,  52;  incredible 
Roman  guard  asleep,  53; 
terrified  Apostles  would  not 
dare  or  wish  to  disturb  tomb, 
53;  theory  that  Jews  removed 
Body  disproved,  53;  did  not 
dispute  Apostles'  story  when 
brought  before  them,  54; 
many  enemies  converted,  54, 
55;  evidence  on  side  of  friends, 
56;  remarkable  change  of 
conduct  in  the  Apostles,  56; 
Sacraments  of  the  Gospel, 
57,  58;  divergences  in  Gospels 
explained,  59,  60;  each  Evan- 
gelist views  Resurrection  from 
his  own  standpoint  of  the 
different  side  of  Christ's  na- 
ture, 61,  62;  testimony  of  the 
women  and  the  graveclothes, 
63,  64;  the  visit  of  the  two 
Apostles,  65;  answer  to  last 
opposing  theory  of  German 
criticism,  66,  67;  Resurrec- 
tion no  myth,  67;  no  spectral 
illusion,  68;  no  hallucination, 
68;  Resurrection  in  accord 
with  doctrine  of  the  Incarna- 
tion, 69,  70 

ROMAN     CLAIM,     The,     Rome 
granted    primacy    by    canon 


law,  305;  but  repudiates  it 
and  claims  supremacy,  305; 
office  distinct  from  episcopate, 
306;  vicegerent  of  Jesus 
Christ,  306;  no  appeal  from 
him  to  Ecumenical  Council, 
307;  supreme  Doctor,  306; 
Monarch  and  centre  of  Unity, 
308;  independent  possessor  of 
Church's  executive,  judicial, 
and  legislative  power,  308;  no 
support  to  claim  in  Holy 
Scripture,  308;  Fathers,  308; 
Eastern  Church  repudiates, 
309;  cannot  be  accounted  for 
his  development  theory,  311; 
the  powers  bestowed  by  Christ 
given  to  all  the  Apostles,  311; 
St.  Peter  not  supreme  governor 
of  Church,  312;  St.  Peter 
and  first  Council,  313;  to 
St.  John  given  vision  of  the 
Church,  313;  to  St.  Paul 
the  truth  that  Church  is 
Christ's  Body,  315;  Christ 
appointed  the  Holy  Ghost 
His  Vicar,  316;  is  Pope  in- 
fallible? 316;  St.  Paul's  re- 
buke of  St.  Peter,  316;  St. 
Peter  calls  himself  fellow- 
elder,  317;  the  four  Patri- 
archates of  East,  317;  St. 
Cyril's  commentary  on  re- 
newal of  Peter's  apostleship 
by  Christ,  318;  St.  Peter's 
question  to  the  Risen  Lord 
concerning  St.  John  and  the 
Lord's  answer,  318;  Christ's 
words  about  Satan  sifting 
Peter  as  wheat,  319;  The 


378 


INDEX 


Rock,  320;  meaning  of 
"this"  in  "this  rock,"  321; 
Roman  interpretation  un- 
grammatical,  324;  Fathers 
against  it,  327 
ROUSSEAU,  44 

SACRAMENTS,  The  Seven,  Gospel 
system  analogous  to  God's 
processes  in  natural  world, 
217;  Sacraments  Holy  Mys- 
teries, 217;  arranged  in  two 
classes,  217;  four  kinds  of 
Baptism  in  New  Testament, 
218  seq.;  Christian  Baptism, 
220;  action  of  Baptism,  220; 
effect  of  loss  of  Baptism  in 
America,  222;  three  designa- 
tions of  Confirmation  in  Scrip- 
ture, 223;  how  administered 
in  East  and  West,  223;  effect 
of  Confirmation,  224;  sacra- 
ment of  Penance,  226;  its 
three  acts,  226  seq.;  Holy 
Unction,  230;  St.  James,  231; 
Holy  Orders  and  Marriage, 
233;  matter  and  form  in 
Marriage,  234;  indissolu- 
bility,  234;  the  three  kinds 
of  Christian  marriage,  235; 
Holy  Eucharist,  237;  a  wit- 
ness to  the  faith,  238;  a  com- 
munion, 238;  a  sacrifice,  240 

SACRIFICE,  recognized  mode  of 
man's  approach  to  his  Deity, 
148;  origin  and  meaning,  148; 
religion  of  nature,  149;  higher 
ethical  perceptions  in  Hebrew, 
150;  gradual  growth  of  ne- 
cessity of  an  official  in  priestly 


character,  150;  Montesquieu, 
150;  sacrifices  established  of 
two-fold  character,  151;  ex- 
pression of  corporate  life,  151; 
individual's  relation  to  God, 
152;  ritual  valueless  without 
the  offering  of  heart  and  will, 
152;  further  developments  of 
law  of  sacrifice  in  Christ,  153; 
sacrifice  the  means  reciprocal, 
Sacramental  action  between 
God  and  man,  156;  in  Eden, 
157;  under  patriarchs,  157;  in 
the  Church,  158;  Eucharist, 
159;  some  Protestant  objec- 
tions, 161 

SAYINGS  OF  JESUS,  13 

SECESSIONS,  Tractarian  move- 
ment in  Anglican  Church,  343; 
opposition  by  Bishops  and 
Journals,  344;  natural  that 
under  opposition  some  should 
secede,  344;  no  great  student 
left,  345;  Anglican  Church 
extending,  345;  Rome's  un- 
ceasing efforts  in  proselyting, 
346;  number  of  secessions 
very  small  (one  per  cent),  347; 
Old  Catholic  revolt,  347; 
effect  on  spiritual  lives  of 
seceders,  350;  sin  of  secession 
a  deadly  one,  351 

SERGIUS,  Patriarch,  137 

STILLINGFLEET,  Bishop,  191 

STRAUSS,  49 

TEMPTATION  OF  CHRIST,  Christ 
no  example  to  us  if  not  tried 
by  temptation,  71;  how  recon- 
cile His  temptation  with  His 


INDEX 


379 


absolute  sinlessness,  72;  the 
three  kinds  of  Temptation 
to  which  He  was  exposed, 
73,  74;  His  strain  perpetual, 
75,  76;  in  body,  soul,  affec- 
tions, moral  and  spiritual 
nature,  77,  82;  culminated  on 
Calvary,  82;  hence  can  sym- 
pathize and  show  His  love  to 
us,  83 

TERTULLIAN,  scene  of  St.  Peter's 
martyrdom,  302 

THOMAS  AQUINAS,  ST.,  9,  106 

UNCTION,  230 

UNITY,  Church  a  spiritual  or- 
ganism, 242;  three  groups 


in  triumphant,  expectant,  mil- 
itant conditions,  243;  Prin- 
ciple of  unity,  243;  difference 
between  unity  and  union, 
240;  Papacy  not  the  principle 
of  unity,  244  seq.;  present 
condition  of  Christendom  in 
type  and  prophecy,  249;  need 
not  despair,  249;  Catholics 
owe  three  duties  to  Church, 
250;  love  the  principle  of 
unity,  253;  the  communion 
of  Saints,  254 

VERONICA,  Legend  of,  66 
VINCENT,  ST.,  106 
VIRGIL,  27 


V.! 


A...    mm  HUI  i|i|]  |||||  mil  |||    | 
001  008  822     7 


THE  LIBRARY 
UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 

Santa  Barbara 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW. 


Series  94H2 


